Iran’s Photoshop job

23 comments on “Iran’s Photoshop job ”

• Comments are now closed

1. jafapete 1

   11 July 2008 at 2:49 pm

   How about Faux News’ use of photoshop to slag off its critics, including allegedly making one look more Jewish (although I can’t see that myself). Links and background: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/08/bill-oreilly-takes-on-emn_n_111432.html
2. mike 2

   11 July 2008 at 3:01 pm

   Not as good as Hel’s facial on the pledge card though fella’s
3. Phil 3

   11 July 2008 at 3:05 pm

   It’s actually a pretty good looking fake…

   I wonder how long before it gets to http://www.worth1000.com ?
4. chris 4

   11 July 2008 at 3:39 pm

   Lots more Faux News antics.

   http://www.metafilter.com/tags/FoxNews
5. jafapete 5

   11 July 2008 at 3:50 pm

   Thanks Chris, Loved the line in response to the question, “Will the NYT respond (to Faux News)?

   No, Times Culture Editor Sam Sifton says, “it is fighting with a pig, everyone gets dirty and the pig likes it.” (Which is actually a response in and of itself, so I presume the pig-fighting’s begun.)
6. andy 6

   11 July 2008 at 4:45 pm

   Why should we trust what the NYTimes said(Judith Miller), they could have willingly placed a doctored photo online only to discredit it later. Furthering the meme that Iran (or scary brown people) are untrustworthy, threatening and dangerous nuke toting Muslims.

   The claim that it was released on the Revolutionary Guards website WTF (can’t find it on google so must not exist :))! The US is always an honest actor, and never tells untruths.

   Niger yellow cake
   WMDs in Iraq
   Gulf of tonkin….
7. Steve Pierson 7

   11 July 2008 at 4:54 pm

   I love that the US is building a it’s anti-ballistic missile radar station in the Czech republic and an interceptor base in Poland and says it’s to protect against Iranian missiles.

   Umm, Iran’s missiles can’t reach that far (and you actually need to place your interceptor and radar bases well inside the range of the missiles you want to shoot down)
8. Falafulu Fisi 8

   11 July 2008 at 6:53 pm

   Steve Pierson said…
   Umm, Iran’s missiles can’t reach that far

   Over time, the Iranian technology improves and they can reach those targets.

   Those Iranian missiles would be rendered useless by the advanced Israeli Arrow Anti-ballistic Missile defense systems. The arrow system is an advanced version of the Patriot anti-Missile systems that were successfully used in the Gulf war to shoot down Iraqi scuds.

   It was reported in the journal of IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, that the Israelis had invented some type of superior hybrids of the popular Kalman Filter (KF) algorithm. The development was reported to done at the Israeli’s prestigious Technion Institute (which is the equivalent of world class technology MIT – Massachusetts Institute of Technology). The Israelis KF-hybrids is a self-learning and adaptive, and this is the reason it is very accurate in its kill rate. The Arrow missile with its KF-hybrid control system adapts itself in realtime when it guides itself to the incoming target missile. There are different forms of Kalman Filter available today that have been used in modern electronics for signal de-noising, such as Kalman Filter chip found in computer ICs (Integrated Circuits) as well as mobile devices (such as phones , pda, etc).

   The Iranians are simply suicidal if they fire missiles back to Israel as a retaliation or as a preemptive strike, because Israel’s defense system is far superior than anything Iran possesses at the moment.
9. Falafulu Fisi 9

   11 July 2008 at 6:59 pm

   Those missile tests were shown on TV news. So, C’mon guys, you can’t photoshopped those video clips.

   By the way, my last comment (before this one) disappeared when I click the submit button, perhaps it went straight to the Stardard’s spamfolder or being deleted. That message has 3 URLs in it, so perhaps the spamfilter thinks it is spam.
10. andy 10

    11 July 2008 at 7:55 pm

    FF

    if you get the captcha incorrect it goes to the pixel grave yard, try again with one link per post!

    You got a link to video? My argument still stands NYtimes and US govt can plant propaganda and then pretend it was bad Iranian agit prop..

    Neither parties are innocent..
11. T-rex 11

    11 July 2008 at 8:20 pm

    I’m not sure that’s accurate Steve.

    The Shahab 3 missile is listed as having a range of 2000km with a 1 Ton warhead. From the northern tip of Iran that would allow a strike to within 100km of the southern border of Poland. I think it’s fair to assume that Iran will attempt to further increase the range given they’re trying to use it to project force (whether offensively or defensively is irrelevant to the argument of increased range).

    The point at which interception is attempted is dependent on the type of missile used for interception and the target. You’re correct that standard protocol for ICBM’s is a orbital phase intercept (I think because that allows intercept prior to MIRV launch), but some systems (such as Patriot) are intended for terminal phase intercept. I’m not sure what the system being installed in Poland is intended to be.

    This is not to say I’m sure it’s a good idea. Certainly I think the situation with Russia needs to be very carefully considered. But Iran is not far from having the capability to strike into Europe, is attempting (and well on the way to) developing nuclear weapons, and appears to be led by dangerous extremists who openly advocate the annihilation of Israel. So I can’t quite bring myself to say I think the missile defense system is an entirely bad idea.
12. Falafulu Fisi 12

    11 July 2008 at 8:32 pm

    Steve Pierson said…
    Umm, Iran’s missiles can’t reach that far

    Steve, so you think that technology stays static over time? This is naive thinking. We all know that technology progresses and it won’t be too long before Iran perfect their missiles to further the target distance they could possibly reach.

    Anyway, those Iranian missiles would be rendered useless by the advanced Israelis Arrow Anti-ballistic Missile defense systems. The arrow system is an advanced version of the Patriot anti-Missile system that were successfully used in the Gulf war to shoot down Iraqi scuds.

    It was reported in the IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control peer reviewed technical journal that the Arrow systems used some kind of self-learning and adaptive hybrid Kalman Filter signal processing algorithm to perfect the Arrow’s guidance system which scientists at prestigious Technion Institute (Israel’s equivalent of world class technology driven MIT – Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the US). This is the reason why the Arrow’s kill rate is very high.

    Andy said…
    You got a link to video?

    I’ll try and search for it, because the missile test was shown in both TV1 & TV3 news last night.
13. Falafulu Fisi 13

    11 July 2008 at 8:44 pm

    Andy, here is one clip I found at YouTube:

    Iran Missile Test! How Will Israel Respond?

    Now, you can tell me if the clip was photoshopped.
14. T-rex 14

    11 July 2008 at 8:48 pm

    Fisi – Not nearly as naive as your statement above: “Rendered useless”. That is a stupidly superior attitude, precisely the kind of tech-obsession that made the uninformed elite of the US (note, their generals disagreed with them) think that they could barge in and clean up iraq in a week or two.
    At best, you can increase your odds. Nothing is foolproof, and relying on asymmetric warfare rather than peace to keep you safe is beyond stupid.

    I actually know what all of the terms you use in your third paragraph mean, and I can only say: So?

    —

    Also – there’s two photos there. Clearly ONE of them has been altered, so I don’t know what the hell the video you saw on TV has to do with anything. Quite aside from the fact that it’s painfully obvious that the 4th missile has been added in. Look at the characteristic of the smoke – it’s identical to the one to its right. The odds of that “just happening” are astronomically low.
15. T-rex 15

    11 July 2008 at 8:51 pm

    And there you go. 48 seconds into the clip you show – 3 missiles launched. Photo above? 4 missiles launched.
16. Falafulu Fisi 16

    11 July 2008 at 9:18 pm

    T-rex said…
    That is a stupidly superior attitude, precisely the kind of tech-obsession that made the uninformed elite of the US (note, their generals disagreed with them) think that they could barge in and clean up iraq in a week or two.

    That’s exactly what happened. Iraq capitulated in about 3 or 4 weeks. Are you trying to re-write history? Of course superior technology does not guarantee a 100% protection against deaths (civilians or otherwise), but the one who possesses superior technology do minimize their casualties and this is an undeniable fact.

    I thought you’re one of those tech-obsession around, am I correct? Do you use a mobile phone? How about a computer? If you go to my village in Tonga, you won’t find a mobile phone or see a computer, even electricity. People still use Kerosene lamps, open fire for cooking, etc… Reason? They’re not in the category of tech-obsession such as you & me where we use them as necessities.

    T-rex said…
    I actually know what all of the terms you use in your third paragraph mean, and I can only say: So?

    It was intended for people like you who claim to know. Isn’t it better to make a point and state clearly of the WHYs? If not why not? MY quote was to explain the imbalance of technology between enemies facing off each other, which if one understands them in general terms then they won’t be fuel by others throwing around the misleading idea that Israel is a laugh. That’s the perspective I am coming from.

    It would be similar if someone is saying (hypothetically) that Frank Baniamarama of Fiji or King Taufa’ahau of Tonga are both test firing their own missiles that perhaps could read NZ? One has only to point out that NZ has superior technology in such and such that could render the Fijian & Tongan missile useless. No, ifs no buts. But if some still insist otherwise, then you know straight away that they have pre-conceived ideas and are hard to be convinced.

    T-rex said…
    Nothing is foolproof,

    Did I say that the Arrow System is fool-proof ? If you think so, can you point out which sentence in my message that indicates that I have said so. Note that I used the term high kill rate not 100%, which the 2 are not the same.

    BTW, if you work in the domain of control systems design/ signal processing, I do algorithm development/consultant in this domain. If you have an upcoming project, perhaps we can chat.
17. Bill 17

    11 July 2008 at 9:19 pm

    Read it somewhere then checked out the photo for myself.

    The point made was that the launchers are not equidistant from the camera but the missiles are all the same size.

    And am I alone in thinking that all the missiles look kind of ‘drawn on’?

    Also, the vehicles, as far as I can make out should appear in both pictures too. But enough of ‘Spot the Difference’. There’s no prize.
18. T-rex 18

    11 July 2008 at 9:44 pm

    Briefly because I’m trying to sort out this immigration crap.

    1) Iraqs state military capitulated, and the country now remains in the grip of a civil war against insurgent forces who kill coalition soldiers on a regular basis using relatively low tech weapons systems despite the huge technological advantage of the coalition forces. Advanced technology confers a huge advantage, but it certainly doesn’t make you ‘safe’.

    2) The terms you use sound space age-y and give a false perception of a technology imbalance to those that don’t understand them. Kalman filters and neural networks are not new, and do not guarantee any degree of infallability.

    3) The only antimissile systems NZ has are mounted on the frigates. If Tonga or Fiji had missiles capable of reaching NZ I would be very, VERY worried. Tons of if’s, tons of maybes. The soldiers in the barracks at Dhahran probably thought they were safe too – then a Scud got past the patriot system and 28 of them were killed.

    4) You said the arrow system rendered the iranian missile system useless. That implies a 0% chance of failure.

    I cannot help your with employment at present sorry – if you’re after work in the field contact the various consultancy’s, they’re usually looking for engineers.
19. Falafulu Fisi 19

    11 July 2008 at 10:10 pm

    T-Rex said…
    Kalman filters and neural networks are not new, and do not guarantee any degree of infallability.

    Correct Kalman Filter (KF) & Artificial Neural Network (ANN) are not new, but what is new is the hybridization of these different algorithms into a new superior performance single-framework-algorithm that was achieved by stand-alone KF or ANN themselves alone. that I stated clearly in my message. That is this is the state-of-the-art that probably evades you. You need to keep up with the literatures man, because you have showed infallibility here. Here is an example of such hybrid : Neural Kalman filter

    There is tons of different hybrids that have been made available in the literatures recently, as Kalman/Wavelet, Kalman/Bayesian, Neural/Fuzzy/Kalman, Genetic/Kalman, Kalman/Support Vector Machines, Kalman/Rough Sets, Kalman/Hidden Markov Model and so forth.

    T-rex said…
    I cannot help your with employment at present sorry – if you’re after work in the field contact the various consultancy’s, they’re usually looking for engineers.

    I am looking to expand my consultancy to get more clients. Control systems design / Signal processing is only part of what I do which ranges from computational economics/finance, image/object recognition & retrieval to content/web search engine numerical modeling.

    T-rex said…
    You said the arrow system rendered the iranian missile system useless. That implies a 0% chance of failure.

    Perhaps our difference is semantics.
20. john 20

    11 July 2008 at 10:39 pm

    UMR customer data base;

    Helen Clark
    Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
21. T-rex 21

    11 July 2008 at 10:40 pm

    I say again: SO WHAT?

    We’ve jumped from photoshop to defense policy, and now you want to argue the merits of control theory?!? Incidentally, that article you linked to is four years old, I’ve been using the concepts for at least two years. Hell, my version of MATLAB has a toolbox for adaptive filter design. A point which, like every point you made above, is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT!
22. Falafulu Fisi 22

    11 July 2008 at 11:05 pm

    T-rex said…
    We’ve jumped from photoshop.

    This whole post was meant to be sensational and I am surprised that someone like you have been taken for a ride? Does it matter if there were 3 missiles or 4 , etc? It wouldn’t change the fact the missile tests took place.

    T-rex said…
    Incidentally, that article you linked to is four years old, I’ve been using the concepts for at least two years.

    That’s just for a quick reference, but there are more that you can find at the School of Engineering Library (Auckland University). Check out their weekly incoming new books/journals that are placed & displayed at the temporary shelf, which after a week these items are then taken to the permanent shelf.

    T-rex said…
    Hell, my version of MATLAB has a toolbox for adaptive filter design.

    You use a toolbox??? Well, I write the real thing in Java, not use a toolbox that has been pre-written by those at MathWorks who do understand & know of how to write them. Besides the only hybrids that I am aware of that exist in the official Matlab toolbox is the ANFIS (Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System) and that is the only ones. If one has to write his own hybrid , you have to start from a fresh.

    Anyway, technology discussion helps, because some people would start spreading misleading comments, if they don’t understand.
23. T-rex 23

    11 July 2008 at 11:13 pm

    HA!

    I can’t just imagine it, malicious rumours flying around that the israelis used an open loop controller rather than ANN hybrid… what would people think!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS