VintageComics

I didn't put a cost to it. I simply said it's still not feasible and is not happening anytime soon. You seem to contradict yourself here, because above you say it's not as expensive as I've suggested, and here you say we're not far off from achieving "economic equivalence". What's far off? So the question, which has stayed consistent all along through all the various threads and discussions is, when will it be economically feasible to implement at CGC? We can't even have automated cars yet (although that's coming), which doesn't take a lot of fine, motor skill work. It's all macro stuff. We can't have robots perform surgeries without human control and involvement, which you yourself have stated. We can't even have basic robots deliver Uber food orders yet. I once saw one of those robots hit a street pole at full speed. I personally believe we'll sooner have automated cars for the public, robot surgeons without human involvement and Uber eats vehicles that don't hit poles before we have robot graders at CGC. I don't think we'll see it within a decade.

Conclusion? Make better films. Well duh, we've been saying that here for years. The central point for the MCU that everything post Avengers / Infinity Saga feels like a post script is bang on. It doesn't feel like they're building toward anything. Every Avengers related movies had this internal sense of inertia that you could sense, almost like a Christopher Nolan movie, where every movie has it's own internal clock, and you know it's ticking and time is running out. This internal sense of inertia and movement is missing from the last batch of MCU movies. Thanks for posting that, Canuckie.

What do you advise when it's a nut with issues that's done the 'engagement'? Cat has attacked me numerous times on these forums, as have others. They attack because they disagree, but they can't play fair or engage without producing worthwhile discussion points, so they hit below the belt to shame me or try to get my discussion shut down by moderation much like you did for over 2 years. I am doing my best to not engage with the attacks. I'm not perfect, but I certainly never instigate. This post of yours is just another clear instigation.

Nope, I didn't know who he was until we discovered the ASM 252 photos, 9.9 knew who of him for a few weeks, I think only because of the fact that all those 9.8 MJs hit grailz in November. But I remember checking his IG profile before he made it private and not many people followed him. So overall, some people in the high end book buying community knew him but most people did not know he even existed. Which all makes sense...why make yourself known to a lot when you're ripping people off There was a lot of talking, but in the 1st video, 9.9 made it sound like it was someone known in that particular market, when 9.9 said "my post [about the #252 problem] got around, and they [people who are usually vocal about controversy in his circles] shut the **** up, and they didn't say ****, because some people shut the **** up and some people kept their mouth shut...why is that?"...meaning, who knew what? I'm basically paraphrasing but that's how I remembered it. He made it sound like people in HIS circles knew about this seller and went quiet when the scam broke. That's how I understood it. 9.9 also went on to say that it might bring a little short term pain but in the long run, it would be better for everyone over all. That's how I remembered the discussion. Did I misremember this?

You obviously haven't read the thread. The entire reason the thread was started was because two different books had the same certification number. The entire discussion stemmed out of this and more than one book has been uncovered with the same problem. Whether someone bought them or not is secondary.

I've watched the 3 or 4 videos and yes 9.9 says they "have the name". I was assuming it's the same BR name that has been mentioned here, which I in turn assume is an alias, accomplice or front for the actual criminal mastermind. I'd be interested in knowing if the name WC Dave and 9.9 have is BR or another name. Not directed at any one person, but I can't believe we're 9 days into this and people are still struggling to remember the simplest, earliest and most basic details. I'm usually the one with the bad memory. They clearly stated this was someone well known in that niche of the hobby (MJ / Newsstand variants). They clearly stated others knew who he was. Now several people in this thread know who it is. I know lots of people laughed at me when I stated that I was simply trying to 'moderate' the discussion a few days ago, but all I was trying to root out bad information, rampant speculation that was a dead end and trim down on the exaggeration. I'm not sure what has happened over the years, but boardies used to be able to stay on track much better.

Who said they're not standardized? They're time consuming. Sure, it's 'only a couple of seconds' per note, but when you grade several 1000 books a day that translates into a lot of time. They're just more interested in grading books and pumping out volume than taking detailed notes for people like you and me.

Again, a misunderstanding about what the notes are. The CGC graders notes are notes for internal use amongst THE GRADERS so that they don't miss something during the grading process. The notes are NOT intended for us, the end consumers. They only became publicly available due to public demand. The notes are not exhaustive and the public doesn't determine which notes are important and which aren't. The only reason I ever check the notes is on the off chance that there's something in the notes that I may have missed. You can't look to the notes as some sort of standardized thing. It isn't. You're lucky to even see them as most books no longer have notes, and I assume this is simply to save time during the grading process.

You're really going to need to get caught up in this thread for your answers because from your post, you're missing a lot of info.

The way you explained it is the way I understood it as well. I don't remember any mention of this guy being photographed at conventions. There is a LOT of speculation in this thread.

Notes are very misunderstood by the general public. CGC has no consistent standard for taking notes. They're not exhaustive. They just list whatever they feel like listing at the time the book is in front of them. The notes could change every time the book is submitted. I listened to the 1st 2 or 3 videos and stopped, but I know that this person is not unknown in variant circles (MJ inserts, Newsstands).

I believe they got a warning for speaking about the competition, which is known not to be allowed.

I think it'll be roughly a decade for the economics to be favorable. The example from Neuroscience that's orders of magnitude greater in complexity than comic book grading would made clear the AI capabilities already exist for it. It sounds like you're saying that it like will be economically feasible once bio-digital convergence becomes a regular thing, which is what I'd already stated. A decade sounds far more realistic to me than the people who think it can be done feasibly today.

Well, it IS my thread, right? But more specifically, the discussion came out of the scam in the #252 thread and it was ALWAYS about using AI to grade comics to prevent scams and improve consistency, so yeah, the discussion was about the grading process and not just one aspect of grading, like PQ, which I have already agreed multiple times, including in that thread, that AI was already capable of doing. Besides, CGC has already started using AI in some aspects. Why would be be debating that when it's already begun? Of course. The question is when?

These are not AI problems, they're hardware problems, but ones that could be initially handled through an human operator opening everything and imaging them. Imaging items in a high resolution and high-quality environment is not difficult. Google has been doing it for years and their systems are getting better and better. None of the things you have talked about in this thread (or the other one) are AI issues. I'm aware of the difference between hardware and software problems, but the hardware problem makes it an IMPLEMENTATION problem and that's really what's being discussed. On it's face, alone, AI can likely grade a cover quite easily but the complexity comes from multiple pages and the learning curve of facing new problems. I don't think the average collector realizes some of the complexities in grading. It's not NASA level complexity, but it is a new twist and if you're grading a lot of comics each day, that means EACH DAY new combinations or types of defects are found and graders need to rethink things. These sorts of things are usually talked through in seconds among graders and learned from. For an AI program it would stop the assembly line until you can teach it a new way to deal with it. Correct, and that's where @JC25427N was actively discussing the software and learning issues in the quotes that I copied over from the other thread. Grading cards is apparently already here on a small scale. The hardware issue is the problem. I'm not so sure, but that's why we're having this discussion.

I have what 'may' be a small piece of potential good news. I spoke to a very prominent, international convention dealer and shared the name of the alleged person involved (the real name, not the name speculated on in this thread) and they replied that they'd never heard the name before. This seems to makes it sound like the person allegedly involved may not have done much business on the convention circuit. If they had been on the con circuit, this dealer definitely would have heard of them. Take that for what you will at this point. I take it as good news that this debacle may not have spread beyond online sales and into convention sales.

Looks like it is all about bad pressing in all its forms, including shrinkage (Costanzas) and blurring of inked dates on the cover, and I guess the "scam" is that a lot of them were being graded highly (9.6 and such). The "scam" was that covers shrank and people were surprised they received high grades. It wasn't really a scam, it was more of an uproar. The reality is that covers for newsprint comic books ALWAYS shrink, or better put, change shape to varying degrees as to interior pages, and some pressing techniques may accelerate or exaggerate that effect. For example, SA Marvels weren't printed with 'Marvel overhang' at the tops of covers and a shorter right edge. They were all cut flush on 3 sides originally, and then AFTER publishing the cover and interior pages changed shape over time, with the cover looking longer over time and less wide and the interior pages growing shorter and more wide. This change in shape happens due to the change in moisture content of the paper, the pulp in the paper settling and due to ambient factors that the books are stored in.

They are trying to dump the books on rubes via Social Media. Likely at just below "FMV" and accepting Friends n Family only type payments. Do you have any proof of this or are you just guessing? You should read this post.

Question 1) How do you capture head on images of pages unless you open the book 30-60 times at a 45 degree angle or greater? Question 2) Who or what will do the opening? Question 3) You'd need another 30-60 images of each page at an angle then? Question 4) How much time do you foresee this taking just for one book?

That's not what the discussion is about. Almost everyone agrees it can or will be able to do SOME of the grading chores. This discussion is about whether it can do ALL of the grading chores and if it's feasible (cost efficient / profitable / accurate / quick enough).

Or it can't be done economically yet. NASA could probably build a system that works reasonably well, but it wouldn't be for public consumption at NASA levels. Could it do it fast enough? Great topic for discussion. You seem very well versed. So how do they hold the book for imaging, flip the pages and how long would each book take? And how accurate would it be?

Sorry, just got caught up. Is Brees the only name you saw on eBay invoice, Paypal invoice and / or the box? I ask because I've actually seen people use pseudonyms on their eBay accounts over the years. Not sure if it's still possible to do that or not but it used to be a very common practice. Danny Dupcack had a pseudonym IIRC (or several). It is possible that they're using either a pseudonym or someone else is shipping packages for them? --------------------------------------------------------- The information I have received, which I have shared with a boardie in this thread who is on top of the discussion, is a very different name. What I suspect, and this is just a guess, is that when the seller allegedly found this way of gaming the system they possibly started using a pseudonym. The name from the information I received is linked to an older eBay account and not the newer accounts, and they may have changed the registered name on eBay at some point at roughly the same time the alleged gaming began. That's just a spitball guess at this point.

Some people did, but my reply wasn't to you, it was a general reply.

Actually, my favorite 'Roy' character was Michael Shannon in Midnight Special, a TERRIFIC movie, and I watched this movie a few days after I went on a date with a woman named Shannon, which etched it into my memory. It was a pretty neat co-incidence. If you like Superhero stories, this movie is a must see. EDITED out spoilers. It's great. Watch it.

Colluding. The word is 'colluding'. You're publicly accusing auction houses of colluding with CGC to cover up fraudulent, potentially criminal behavior?