>>5446876 it would be awesome if he retweeted it like this:
except "bye Crooked Hillary"
yes, bye bye
I've made no assumptions as to the architecture of the new comm system, nor the path of the proxies sending them out.
for all we know they could be all virtual devices on a development box, only one 'real' device with a whole bunch of chroot-jailed virtualized development environments designed to proxy and spoof, and shock and awe.
make no assumptions. The office of the . . . . . . . has a lot of resources that we don't know anything about.
if you understand how to develop and deploy embeddd devices, and how to simulate clusters of different devices, using a single super computer and a bunch of virtualized linuxes each with it's own totally virtual (no real hardware) mimicing even the mac address . . . and set up to proxy the content as if the phone is in a diverse part of the world but in order to allow for it to go through the worlds networks, each device can actually be proxied through remote actual servers distant to the virtualized one.
so we might 'see' fifty people in a bunch of different locations, but in fact it would all be a simulation.
People not involved in the test might think that there are 50 real devices.
proxies would be needed (network hopping proxies that will let you funnal all your ICP/IP packetts over to it so that it seems as though it originates from there and the real origin is scrubbed.
now picture all of that as a complex app that someone puts on a handheld. It control that server box with all the n^q possible links,(I'm being hyperbolic) and no one knows where the real device is anymore, or where the senders are.
sounds complicated? It would just look like a block diagram charting out nodes that animates in real time overlaying a map of the world and if those who oppose Q have such tools to try to hunt down Q posters . . . . now they have to deal with a lot more complexity.
I will suggest again that if we are using scientific methods of analysis about this, we can not know the path, through networks, of a Q post, nor assume, anymore, that it is a 'device' like one that can get at the sell-a-phone stores.
It's the highest end telecom networking development environments morphed into a secure comm system designed to make the posters look like shit-posting porn-site mongering idiots (patriots recall? all the porn at 8ch) meanwhile they are all shocked . . . . and awed.
all the constant blther about 'oh the new rules ' or 'Q has the new sellphone or he's got new devices'
We really can't say how the messages are routed anymore, can we?
so of course there are new actual devices. But there may also be new virtual devices.
or is it just one actual a a bunch of virtuals?
or a bunch of actuals and a bunch of virtuals. . .
and imagine that they have their own comm system that is faster between all these virtual or real devices.
the point: we can't really know what the new architectures is. WE can't know how the networks are accessed, and hopped thorugh (using proxy servers), and we certainly don't know how many devices just based upon the number of tests.
We can count IDs.
we can say 'each ID is a different device'
but is it really? Or can someone just bloop a toggle on an app and 'hop' to a different virtual device that proxies out of a different server?
I'm suggesting we have to treat Q posting device architecture, and implied private network between devices, as a black box. We can't really know if it's one or many, virtual or actual, or if they are all synched to one, or not. Or used as a triggering system.