Why?
>is there any proof that is 100% verifiable that hitler was an nwo puppet based off of Q's old post?
There is not much evidence from that far back that has been digitized without being filtered.
>so it's just speculation?
Logic. Hitler was a dope who couldn't even write Mein Kampf by himself (he plagiarized most of it from other sources). So he wasn't the brains of the operation. So, knowing what you now know about the world, what people do we supposed WAS the brains of the operation? 'Ultra-rich European families with occult leanings' would be the obvious answer. They are the same people who seem to be pushing for the European Union, the same objective through different means.
1) Put the links here. Don't send us on a wild goose chase.
2) There are BLM riots in NZ?
>>10665459 New Zealand heads into Martial law October.
No sauce for this. Link in the NZ bread mentioned leads to just the same pic and deadends:
https://ibb.co/LpWTr78
Be sure to have multiple camo patterns. If we always use the same one consistently then they can compensate for it.
>so, let them blacklist the meme before painting up with camo
>-methinks
>/thoughts?
It will naturally happen that way. However, the clear image will be the "center" of the all the variants. So if they have that one then they can connect it to the others more easily than if they are starting with one with the random modulation. The later with have a greater "distance' from other modulated images. So it may be better to camo everything from the start.
Simply modulating the tone may not be enough. They can adjust the matching parameters to only look at hue. So colored camo may be better. Perhaps the colors should be selected from the image itself. If I was writing the code I'd take every 10th pixel (x and Y), randomly vary the R,G, and B by small amounts and then apply that to the whole nearby 10x10 pixel area. Every product will be unique.
>If I was writing the code I'd take every 10th pixel (x and Y), randomly vary the R,G, and B by small amounts and then apply that to the whole nearby 10x10 pixel area. Every product will be unique.
Or if using Imagemagick… scale down the image to 10th size, generate noise, apply noise to reduced image at 5% opacity, scale up resulting image to original size with no interpolation, apply to original image at 5% opacity.
Kinda like this (I'm not an expert with IM, there may be a better way to do this):
convert input.png -scale 5% +noise Random -scale 2000% input.png -compose Blend -define compose:args=95 -composite output.png
Sorry, that should be "+noise Poisson" and "args=85".
Glad to be of service
Final shell script:
I'm sure this can easily be done with a Windows batch program too. But I haven't made one of those in 20 years. And I don't have a Win machine handy to test it with.