Thread 41448784

We've all seen the diagram pointing out 666 in the Google Chrome logo. Actually the original 2008 logo is hard to interpret as containing sixes, so I decided to focus on the 2011 logo. I was hoping I might be able to apply Bayes' theorem in assigning a probability to the claim that the Chrome logo is intentionally satanic. While there is a problem with analyzing symbology objectively, something that occurred to me recently is that the Chrome logo could easily have been flipped, in which case it wouldn't contain 666. There's a 50% chance that it would've been flipped if the 666 is unintentional, but maybe a 95% chance it would be oriented the right way if it was intentional. This gives a Bayes factor of 1.95, which can be thought of as "the odds of the satanist hypothesis relative to the null hypothesis". A Bayes factor of 2 is nothing really. What would strengthen the claim is if the creator of the 2011 redesign was a satanist. The Bayes factor for this piece of evidence would be MUCH higher since satanists are relatively rare. But who did the redesign?
>In a blog post dated March 21, 2011 (“A fresh take on an icon”), the Chrome team states that the icon redesign is the work of “Steve Rura, Designer”
Here you can see some other graphic designs by Rura: https://dribbble.com/srura (pic related)
Notice anything interesting?

Now, we could apply the same analysis to the (bitten) Apple logo, which was designed by Rob Janoff in 1977, but I'm not sure the result is as compelling. Based on his name, he's of Polish jewish descent, so maybe he just likes the Book of Genesis (as do I).

I'll be honest with you. I used ChatGPT to learn a lot about Bayes factors applied to conspiracy claims. I saved the conversation to a PDF which you can download here: https://limewire.com/d/Mptxr#GVDjZOOLyb

Here are some of the sources it recommended:
Some resulting sources:
1. Proving History: Bayes’s Theorem and the Quest for the Historical Jesus by Richard C. Carrier (2012)
2. Bayesian Belief Protection: A Study of Belief in Conspiracy Theories by Nina Poth & Krzysztof Dolega (2022/2023)
3. Deconstructing the Conspiratorial Mind: the Computational Logic Behind Conspiracy Theories (2022)
4. Cultural evolution in Vietnam’s early 20th century: a Bayesian networks analysis of Franco‑Chinese house designs by Vuong et al. (2019) (see https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.00817)
5. The Computations Underlying Religious Conversion: A Bayesian Decision Model (2023)

Source 4 may be particularly relevant to analyzing architecture/symbols in media, and is available here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.00817
It analyzes Vietnamese architecture and tries to apply Bayesian inference in teasing out French colonial influence. ChatGPT thinks it might be relevant if one were wanting to assign a probability to a statement like "The Sonic the Hedgehog franchise is a freemasonry psyop".

>>41448784 (OP)
Stop it with the AI slop, dude. You're inviting the satanic vampire himself inside your soul and your behavior already shows strong signals of incipient cyberpsychosis.

Being a paranoid schizo is wholesome, adaptative, useful and anti-psychopathic if you do it organically.

The very fucking logo of the tool you're using has the 666 embedded in it, as it is in every building bock of the future Mark of the Beast system. Quit it now.

>>41448903
>organically
>here on the internet
You're here just like I am, hypocrite, probably using Google Chrome right now.
ChatGPT is just a next-gen search engine. It's literally just scraping the internet for information. If you think its output is demonic then you shouldn't be on the internet in the first place.

>>41448962
I live in the same prison as you do, yes, but no I don't use Chrome and I avoid AI brainrot like the plague. Enjoy yours.

>>41448980
It doesn't matter what browser you use to access the same internet. It doesnt matter what search engine you use because they're all using Google page rank. Why don't you create a thread about AI bad instead of spamming off-topic in every other thread?

Why do these threads derail when you bring up the meanings of logos that fall outside The Big 4 boomers discuss?

>biblical and pagan references alike are considered satanic
hmm, maybe that should tell you something...