Your eyes are open, and you do see what you think you see on this page, but when you do a search for any snippet of the paragraph you are looking at, that fragment of text cannot be found. The question then becomes, whether you do know what you are looking at.
This presentation may be ideal for classroom use, but no one is excluded from the challenge.
On the one hand, it may be used to discuss the nature of reality, from a philosophical point of view.
Once the previous point has been pondered, consideration can be made of how false perceptions of what one is exposed to can lead to deceptive conclusions. Those perceptions may have been deliberately created. While the conclusion may be as innocently wrong as when a child sees a magician seemingly cut someone in half – for in that event, one always has a happy ending; or psychologically useful, such as in the case of a person who has had a serious work accident (for example, in the construction industry), and needs to face fears anew to conquer them, before being ready to go back to work, there are always cases of deliberate misuse, made ever more possible by digital manipulation of sound and image.
I would like to stress that wherever I seem to name a person, organization, or “illegal” activity in the first part of this article, such may be the perception to the human eye, but I would guess that for over 99% of all people reading this, they would not be able to find the text which they claim to see. As for the final, poetical part, I do take poetic licence, mixing fact and ideas to create, in part, word plays, even if the reader has a seemingly valid conclusion regarding the person(s) referred to, because of poetic licence, it could be anyone at all. The grammar of the verse should make that clear.
Neither do I care to rush into any conclusions about what countries do right or wrong, whether “our” country, or that of a real or imagined “enemy”. Some ideas on that I have put into an article about the correct formation of conscience.
For me, the author of this little game, it is an exercise in HTML/CSS programming. First, I look to see the correct functioning on my home computer. If this article is published, the domestic version of this work gave the required result. (In truth, it didn’t, but I got lucky after going to the Internet Café to look for more relevant information). A second question then is, whether the web-page mark-up language work correctly with the free version of WordPress. At least it did, before I pressed the “Publish” button.
So then, I hope that for most people, this is an interesting puzzle. I might acknowledge some correct answers, but will not reveal the secret too openly.
Yet, at an opportune moment, the answer to this question may be sufficiently clear, or divulged if not, to allow writers with a modicum of the required knowledge to improve the appearance of their articles, beyond what the basic interface permits.
Now, let us look at the following text, apparently silly, but conforming to our “game plan”.
If you use the browser search function, and type in part of the preceding phrase, you should find it. But don’t stop yet! Changing everything to capitals should not affect anything either, so you should also be able to find the text below, in other words, you should have found more occurrences of the chosen text.
Here is where things get tricky, because I myself do not know the answer to my own questions as I write this sentence. The result may depend on browser settings and installed fonts. Rather than use Times New Roman, I am selecting (as I type this up in Word) the Algerian Font, followed by the Stencil Font. Whether or not these show up correctly on your computer, in total, your selected text should be found 4 times. (I’ve changed this to 5 times now, to make a point.)
If the following two lines are not shown in capitals, the required font(s) is/(are) missing in the reader’s computer.
I notice that in my version of Word, I can find the two texts immediately above, but not the all-capital version immediately below the first text.
I will now repeat the second version from above (the fifth time you should find the result, and immediately below, a sixth version – which you can not find!
Is it not strange, that one of these shows up, and the other not?
If, however, you were to copy part of the above text into your browser search window, you would find it, but none of those further above.
No need to worry, there is nothing malicious about this, nor has the browser ceased to function correctly.
The reader’s task is to puzzle it out, mine is to improve the presentation of this page.
Careful observation will give some clues as to what might be going on. There are at least three implicit clues – there would only be two, had I chosen to deliberately complicate things.
End of Story
I will not waste my time typing up the following in different versions – but the above lines do deserve some kind of closure:
Because as you can see, none of the preceding is found in the following line:
The last word in the preceding sentence figures in one of my more successufl articles. And, on a standard search here, you will not find one of the favourite cartoon characters of my childhood:
Political, Policial, and Philosophical Implications
Our introductory line might be reworded to the philosophical question about the nature of reality.
For, as I write something here, I may choose to induce a thought into the reader’s mind, yet I deny any active rôle in that process.
It is somewhat like the leading question at an interrogation, “subtly” forcing the accused to concede a point, because no legal representative was present to help the accused. Except here, instead of conceding to a question, you will probably spontaneously accept what you see.
I will now expand upon what I did in the first part of this article, with a bit more of seriousness.
A well-known broadcaster in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the name of which only appears to be ВВС – [you cannot type the initials of that broadcaster which you “think” that you see into the search box and find them], on the occasion of the meeting between Trump and Putin, compared the two men. The former profession of the latter was prominently written with 3 letters, which happen to look like – but I am not writing that word – again, you cannot find it in the search box – was “SРY”! Mixing this in with the allegation of Russian НАСКing – the reader read a word I did NOT write – the broadcaster reinforces the idea (second paragraph below the chart on the linked page) that it is believable that a former intelligence agent may still be involved, directly or indirectly, in similar activities.
Let us take this one step further. In using the search box of the browser, the truth of my assertion that I did not write such-and-such a word could be ascertained. What happens, though, if I make a hard-copy of the following, especially if it were poster-sized:
ВВС: РUТІN WАS SРY – АССUЅЕD ОF НАСКЅ.Warning: The above text does not exist anywhere on this page – read the proof!
There are 2 proofs that this is not an image, individual letters or text can be chosen, and if one zooms sufficiently, the smaller text splits into more lines.
If the large text in the above is more than two lines, you might want to zoom out for a moment, to compare with the image file below.
[The text was viewed correctly before I updated it, but changes may yet be necessary.]
ВВС: РUТІN WАS SРY, АССUЅЕD ОF НАСКЅ. Again, I hasten to add, this paragraph contains no name of any organization, person, or activity, save that which the reader imagines that I have written. Let’s make our poster, now:
Should we want to induce someone to believe the preceding, an unsuspecting person completely unaware of the nature of the narrative, and if that person were inside an official building, or watching a newscast from the interior of an official building, could that individual not swear upon a stack of divinely-inspired books about the truth of what was seen?
Now comes the most difficult question of all. Since, as can be verified by using the procedure outlined here previously, that my statement made no allegation against any named organization, person, or activity, can that claim validly hold for the printed copy?
Believe it or not, there are at least two small details in the image which could allow me to negate that I wrote what the reader may have thought. Someone else, however, might accuse me of splitting hairs.
Be that as it may, does some reader see the loop-hole which allows my denial of having written the potentially defamatory text?
Let’s try the reverse of what we have been doing until now. If the reader’s screen is not as dark as I prefer mine to be, it may be visible enough – my name You could force it to be visible by passing the mouse cursor over it, but had the text actually been hidden, that would as little prove that I had actually written what is seen – and that is why the search needs to be carried out to verify my claim.
It would not take arcane programming skills to hide text on a page, but search engines believe that when someone does this, they really do have some sinister purpose, for which reason we will not take the easy route. It would not add to my knowledge. Rather, before going on, I have to study what I need to do. It seems that what I originally did here is not accepted either, (I’ve confused the totally prohibited with the prohibited just the same), so my study of the matter must continue. Just imagine that the green text upon the black were the same color as the background! While I could have chosen dark green, or maybe grey, for all I know, this is also considered bad behaviour. If you have come here, and enjoyed the basic idea, come back in a week or two, to see if I have found a solution. If this page never is indexed, it was blacklisted! Too early to tell.
I even have a third choice for a propaganda technique, said to have been illegal way back in the Sixties. I could, if the system permitted, flash a message at the reader so rapidly that it becomes subliminal, and yet obtain effects in the easily malleable. Wikipedia does not give any example as I write this predating 1978, but I heard about it around 1967.
A disturbing feature about flashing images is that at a certain frequency, they may trigger epilepsy attacks. One time, this happened with a children’s show in Japan. Reason enough not to do it, but the source code is available on pages which teach CSS programming. And I have no idea why they teach how to hide text, if we are not to do it – unless, of course, we do it within the confines of an Intranet or smaller.
It is strange to say, that once, in some conservative Latin American country, a military regime acting in concert with the United States to fight communism, objected to the new math because it suggested moral relativism, the non-existence of absolutes.
The same people who look for absolute truth, however, often try to force out the “right” answer in questioning, whether a detainee, or an agent who does not concur with thek official narrative, let’s say, [you do NOT see it here!] а wеаpоn оf mаѕѕ dеѕtruсtіоn.
It is said, and I am not qualified to assert the truth of the statement, that Russian peasants were prohibited from learning to read before their Revolution. A smilar statement is made about other conservative governments, such as those of Latin America.
While other media make it almost unnecessary to read in order to obtain information in the present age, by whatever means one does inform oneself, or seem to inform oneself, the greatest danger is not that of not being able to make words out of print or sound, but to comprehend their reasonableness. Truths created out of shrill demands, “truths” that vilify, that drone on, as in cold-war propaganda, should be recognized for what they are.
Blind faith is fine in a religion which teaches no harm, but truth requires constant inquiry, and an accrual of knowledge.
In closing, I would like to point our that an article in a popular on-line encyclopedia refers to a Russian agency which encourages learning of the Russian language as a species of soft power initiative, (a.k.a. propaganda provider). It is doubtful whether they make the same accusation about the certain American International Schools in other countries, or Centres of English Culture, the Alliance Française, or the Goethe Institut.
Wi’ eyes wide open, the
Wise open wide their
Minds to the opposing view
In order that, … uh …
[(Wince) Open wide, the
Dentist wants a clue.]
The true hacker wants your account
To decrease, by his preferred amount;
The hacker has some records fixed,
Some traffic fines and failures nixed;
Your number and your name belong
To one with key-stroke skills so strong
To flow, to ‘n fro’, and never slow
To a server in a bathroom hidden –
And when the law will’ve bidden
To see the naughty info there,
You strike up such a haughty air
And claim from RE-view you’re immune
(You’re playing Goldmann`s Sax’ny’s tune)
And claim ‘twas all a Russian hack
‘Cause whoe’er else could have the knack?
Oh! I don’t mean the knacker’s hack!
Of both of these, there’s now a lack,
We’d rather rack a one-time “spy”
Who, of course, bye the bye,
Because of our growing insularity
We just can’t stand his popularity
So say: “He, we’ll never trust
Until we’re mutual nuclear dust
And even then we’ll remonstrate
It’s their fault that our mutual fate
Our “New Land” went to instigate.
Our “New Cons” then investigate
And find purported hairs of Bear
Somewhere in Novaya Zemlya’s cold
‘N claim such proof to be pure gold,
And for that they need the people scare
With big bad wolves, and Russian menace
‘Cause there just isn’t any other genus
On whom we hateful can pin the blame
Should the world go up in flame –
Our watchword – full spectrum dominance
We fail not! – Their come-uppance!
In all of this, no contradiction –
Our eyes are shut – it’s our addiction.
© Paul Karl Moeller
Basic Version uploaded July 9, 2017.
2nd part, and poem, added July 12, 2017.