Just that, having once been “shot” by you, I wouldn’t want you shooting at me.Originally Posted by Clusterfrack
@Totem Polar, any comments?
Just that, having once been “shot” by you, I wouldn’t want you shooting at me.@Totem Polar, any comments?
”But in the end all of these ideas just manufacture new criminals when the problem isn't a lack of criminals.” -JRB
Go fast = raw speed
Not go fast = quickly
"How to dumb down your OODA Loops"
Last edited by Shawn Dodson; 09-09-2023 at 06:28 PM.
I'd love the title/author, if you didn't mind.
"It was the fuck aroundest of times, it was the find outest of times."- 45dotACP
Craig kind of posted the answer to these things with pointing people at Apollo.
Apollo has impressive technical skills that he doubtless honed over many hours of practice. Taking someone's wrist watch off without them realizing it's happening requires a deft touch and excellent dexterity. It takes having practiced with several different types of clasps for wrist watches. He likely used some sort of inanimate stand-in for a person for at least a significant chunk of that development work. Likely the same thing for working things out of people's pockets.
But at some point those technical skills had to be paired with the other skills of reading people and directing their attention. This, I'm sure, took extensive practice. Learning the push/pull he's doing, the subtle ways he blocks their sight at key moments, the way he will start something and if their behavior changes in a manner that's unfavorable to the gambit he immediately reroutes or redirects attention to stay ahead of them. And I'd wager a significant part of all of that was learning who is a likely candidate to be his subject in the first place.
He had to spend a lot of time watching people and interacting with them. Watching for micro-expressions, body language cues, clothing, and combinations of all those things that gave the best chances of what he's trying to accomplish.
We don't think about it this way usually, but violence is an interaction with another person. There is communication happening both ways. The essence of what he's getting at is sending the signal you want the other guy to receive and act on.
A buddy of mine did a fair number of interrogations on child porn cases. His strategy was to just get people to talk. About anything. Didn't matter what, just as long as you start them talking and eventually he would steer into areas relevant to sussing out their level of technical expertise on computing devices to figure out if they could be using effective countermeasures. (Encrypted and hidden disk partitions, file-overwriting utilities, etc) As long as they're talking they're giving him something, even if it's just a way to compare their baseline state talking about mundane stuff to how their behavior, tone of voice, and posture changes when he touches something sensitive or incriminating. All in the effort to sooner or later get them to confess to serious crimes that will send them to jail for a long time.
Usually without them even realizing what he was doing.
He would send a signal that was the opposite of his ultimate intention and read and react as they read and reacted. He still talks to people and gets them to reveal far more about themselves than they ever should now that he's retired. I've watched him get a 7-11 cashier to show him a picture of her clitoral hood piercing inside of 5 minutes of meeting her. He likes talking to people. He likes to see what makes them tick. Getting pictures of their genitals inside 5 minutes isn't quite taking off their wrist watch, but you can see the similarity.
He wasn't born with that, he learned how to do it. Some technical learning, but mostly a whole lot of just interacting with people. Trial and error. This worked, that didn't. Etc.
Last edited by TCinVA; 09-09-2023 at 08:34 PM.
3/15/2016
The second video is an example of "inattentional blindness" (a fancy term to describe tunnel vision).
Not Hambo, but this might be the book, it's a good, not great, read.
https://www.amazon.com/Special-Force.../dp/1665259035
Adding nothing to the conversation since 2015....
Here’s a book on 14 Int.
The Operators: Inside 14 Intelligence Company https://a.co/d/1ZIvFY7
Also not Hambo, but I’m pretty sure that’s the book he was referring to and it’s a hell of a good read.
I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream, but these days I'm here for the revolver and epidemiology information.
That depends on how nerdy you are.If anyone is expecting a Clancy novel, it's not for you. It you want painstaking detail about the detachment, covering everything from recruitment (or outright transfer) to the plan for man portable nukes (is that really a timer?) in E. Germany, this is for you.
https://www.amazon.com/Special-Force...=UTF8&qid=&sr=
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
From standard cognitive psych, attentional effects:
Change blindness : when a person viewing a visual scene apparently fails to detect large changes in the scene. For change blindness to occur, the change coincides with some visual disruption such as a saccade (eye movement) or a brief obscuration of the observed scene or image.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmd...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn2vkQZJeyw
Inattentional blindness, or perceptual blindness, is the phenomenon of not being able to see things that are actually there. This can be a result of having no internal frame of reference to perceive the unseen objects, or it can be the result of the mental focus or attention which cause mental distractions.
Repetition Blindness Subjects are less likely to detect the repetition of a target stimulus than they are to detect a second, different target.
Attentional blink (AB) When presented with a sequence of visual stimuli in rapid succession at the same spatial location on a screen, a participant will often fail to detect a second salient target occurring in succession if it is presented between 200-500ms after the first one.
Inhibition of Return:
If attention focuses on an object and then moves to another object, it is difficult to return attention to that object for several seconds.
------------------
BTW, the professor who did the Gorilla experiment, Ulric Neisser was a buddy of my mentor. I was looking for a dissertation topic and my mentor took me to lunch with Neisser (who was a god in the field) and he suggested something interesting and I followed up on it. Got it published in Nature (a top journal) after I got my degree. Another thing, sometimes a p-f member will denounce higher education (usually because of opposing political views). I am struck repeatedly by how much perceptual and cognitive science runs through the p-f topics of interest. Just saying.
Cloud Yeller of the Boomer Age
Reply With Quote