Generally, In response to your #36, I'll bring my Festival response over, too:
===================
ADemocratNoMore wrote:
"I don't know if anybody remembers the kerfuffle that occurred after one of the hillary / Trump debates from 2016, but as I recall, it looked like hillary was using some kind of prepared notes. I speculated at the time that she could have been using a mature form of E-ink / e-Paper technology."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do remember that HRC kerfuffle -- even did a video analysis that showed there might have been a mini-teleprompter screen embedded in (or applied to) her podium...
"e-Paper/ink" might be a cool way to provide a "canned" speech -- stored in memory -- for prompting a straight, solo, faux "extemporaneous" speech.
But -- for debates -- the weakness of all of these "micro-teleprompter" (e-Paper/ink, pad, contact lenses, audio feeds, etc.) schemes is that they must be sent a (periodic) stream of real-time, responsive data -- to deal with a dynamic, interactive situation like a debate.
However -- even if the data are encrypted, I hear tell that there are "friends" of Q who are the world's best at detecting, recording, decrypting -- and blocking or hijacking -- such signals.
'Insiders' say there's "No Such Agency"... '-}
There's plenty of time until the next debate for the "Wizards & Warlocks" to "do their thing"...
Nous verrons...
TXnMA '-)
> ...the weakness of all of these... schemes is that they must be sent a (periodic) stream of real-time, responsive data — to deal with a dynamic, interactive situation like a debate.
However — even if the data are encrypted, I hear tell that there are “friends” of Q who are the world’s best at detecting, recording, decrypting — and blocking or hijacking — such signals.
May I suggest that, the Wizards, Warlocks, Angels, the President, along with the rest of his team, may not have wanted Biden to have a meltdown.
The Black-Hats would have to know that any of their comms COULD be compromised but the LACK of any jamming might make them think that their encryption was working. Given this premise they might decide that the potential benefits outweighed the negatives.
As far as the use of real-time comms in a debate situation, while the most uncertain variable is the ability of Biden to handle the flow of information, if I were in a similar situation I would eschew audible cues as being too distracting and go with simple bullet-points, presented on the aforementioned Digital-Paper. I myself use bullet points on a notepad and wing the rest, talking off the top of my head when in public situations. Could Biden do it ? I don’t know, but it could be done.
The White-Hats, on the other hand might have another strategy. A reasonably coherent Biden had to go the whole 90 minutes. A meltdown would have prevented the President from getting out a large portion of the bullet points he put before the public. The President didn’t have to get into the weeds, just plant the seeds. As just one example, I heard that the #1 trending google search after the debate was “Hunter Biden”. I dare say that, before the debate, MOST of the general, non-Freeper public had never heard of Hunter or Burisma, or the $100,000,000,000,000 projected cost of the Green New Deal.
In addition, as posited by Dan Bongino, by allowing Biden to stay in the game, the President forced Biden to disavow a number of policy positions held dear by his radical base as well as cement the President’s standing with the Patriot base by his rejection of the extreeme positions of the CommieCrats, without appearing to bully a broken, babbling, addled Grandpa that would present bad optics to the Karens in the audience.
I have much more to say but other things to do right now. Would you like me to continue posting to this thread (topic / sub-thread) when I have time to continue my thoughts ?
One potential topic for a future post, having learned from the best, in the style of Q...
Not only didn’t the dog bark, the whole pack was silent. WHY ?