chronovisor
Temporal Novice
A recommendation to all \"future folk\"
I've read a few of these posts from the "future," and can't help but think there has to be a better way of proving your legitimacy. For example, if I found myself whisked back, say, 40 years, and had no 2009 history book to refer to, I would have to think back to events I know happened after I arrived, then reveal them accordingly.
If I were advising people on July 19, 1969, as to what was about to happen...
I guess the first one is obvious. Even if it weren't all over the news, I could provide a couple of details about the moon landing on the 27th, like maybe Armstrong's quote. That might have been pre-scripted, but probably unknown outside certain circles.
Okay, so something a little less predictable. How about Woodstock? I just now looked it up, and it didn't happen until August 15, 1969. So I could tell people that there was going to be this massive music festival in this little town in NY, and that it would be more gargantuan than anything they had seen.
Still might not do the trick, though. Okay, the next significant event in history that I can think of is the Kent State massacre in 1970. There would be no real way to predict that event 10 months earlier, so I could tell the masses "four people will be killed by National Guardsmen in a shooting during a campus demonstration at Kent State.". And, on May 4 of the following year, it would happen, and hey presto...my legitimacy is unquestioned.
Unless, of course...some gubmint men were monitoring my subversive newsletter, and extra measures were taken, so that no casualties would be possible. It's the same with the guys on these boards saying that the events they mention are changed because they are now known.
So, how about this? Instead of actually giving away the event that is to happen, you encode it just enough so that it is meaningful only after it happens. Like, in July 1969, I could say someting like: "KSOH4STKNATG". It would be pretty random until the event, at which point it could be easily interpreted as, "Kent State Ohio, 4 students killed by National Guardsmen."
9/11 could be encoded as something like "911WTC779311". The date, the buildings, and the three flight numbers. Nothing specific until after it happens. Get it?
So, if I were to say, 173CDDWI, that could eventually be revealed to be that Cameron Diaz will be involved in a drunk driving incident on St. Patrick's Day of next year.
Or, I could just post strings of letters and numbers at random, then wait for the rest of the world to interpret them and hail my future-knowing goodness.
OEN95TOS8B
N38VV5K1
FOTM44OOM
I've read a few of these posts from the "future," and can't help but think there has to be a better way of proving your legitimacy. For example, if I found myself whisked back, say, 40 years, and had no 2009 history book to refer to, I would have to think back to events I know happened after I arrived, then reveal them accordingly.
If I were advising people on July 19, 1969, as to what was about to happen...
I guess the first one is obvious. Even if it weren't all over the news, I could provide a couple of details about the moon landing on the 27th, like maybe Armstrong's quote. That might have been pre-scripted, but probably unknown outside certain circles.
Okay, so something a little less predictable. How about Woodstock? I just now looked it up, and it didn't happen until August 15, 1969. So I could tell people that there was going to be this massive music festival in this little town in NY, and that it would be more gargantuan than anything they had seen.
Still might not do the trick, though. Okay, the next significant event in history that I can think of is the Kent State massacre in 1970. There would be no real way to predict that event 10 months earlier, so I could tell the masses "four people will be killed by National Guardsmen in a shooting during a campus demonstration at Kent State.". And, on May 4 of the following year, it would happen, and hey presto...my legitimacy is unquestioned.
Unless, of course...some gubmint men were monitoring my subversive newsletter, and extra measures were taken, so that no casualties would be possible. It's the same with the guys on these boards saying that the events they mention are changed because they are now known.
So, how about this? Instead of actually giving away the event that is to happen, you encode it just enough so that it is meaningful only after it happens. Like, in July 1969, I could say someting like: "KSOH4STKNATG". It would be pretty random until the event, at which point it could be easily interpreted as, "Kent State Ohio, 4 students killed by National Guardsmen."
9/11 could be encoded as something like "911WTC779311". The date, the buildings, and the three flight numbers. Nothing specific until after it happens. Get it?
So, if I were to say, 173CDDWI, that could eventually be revealed to be that Cameron Diaz will be involved in a drunk driving incident on St. Patrick's Day of next year.
Or, I could just post strings of letters and numbers at random, then wait for the rest of the world to interpret them and hail my future-knowing goodness.
OEN95TOS8B
N38VV5K1
FOTM44OOM