Hello Commanders,
just regarding the most likely hoax discussed previously, OP of the picture uploaded 2 pics actually.
Source: https://i.imgur.com/RMX7vAT.jpg
Source: https://i.imgur.com/3gkVkMW.jpg
and made a "statement":
"i was expecting doubt. i dont mind it. here is a cool fact: raxxla speaks. i wont be giving any clues, or bother with any further proof. "
I never really did photo forensics but I tried, did not really discover anything so maybe one of you could run it and check how much the second pic could be adjusted?
o7
Personal opinion is its balderdash.
In most situations one can apply simple logic to distinguish fact from fiction.
Such information, as is submitted here, can be best described as 'unreliable' and the source is certainly 'unknown'.
If you follow the standards for attributing confidence to investigative intelligence, information only becomes reliable once it can be said at best to be 'known directly' or 'indirectly but corroborated'. Anything lower is untested or unreliable.
Certainly unreliable or untested information can be enough to support an assessment, or a degree of confidence if said information was submitted / obtained multiple times via separate trusted sources, but even then it would be best described as having a low degree of confidence.
You also have the poor structure of data which here, has been edited, namely blurred and is of low quality that initially makes it wholly unreliable as information.
Looking at the data in a colour enhanced format only confirms the likelihood this is false information, although this can be attributed to its poor quality rather than manipulation. So at best if we think it has been manipulated we can class this also as 'suspected to be false'.
I agree the theory Raxxla has already been visited by multiple Cmdrs is plausible but the number must be marginal at best, seeing as no one else has leaked anything consistently, the submition of information here and like this, may be in keeping with such clandestine acts, but there is no indication of this, so it maybe safe to assume impling this is someone simply seeking public acknowledgement, a claim to fame.
Cryptographic meaning only adds suspicious intent to the source, it does not confirm it. If you want people to believe you, most people will give up all information in some form, even if its includes false information as information is power.
Here its marginal, they are holding back information. They are retaining their control.
But this is not real life, its a game so real life equivalents may not be applicable, as we cant assess the age nor intent of the source.
Given them the benifit of doubt, e.g. if we acknowledge our own bias and treat the information as initially true, then the first image still tells us nothing, as it is edited, it is simply an unsubstantiated claim.
If I were to do something simular, my initial thought would be, I cant publish this image, not without editing it first, because someone will be able to use it to find the location. However by editing it I heavily flavour my intent as being innately suspicious. So I wouldn't actually post it, unless of course I was either immature and unaware of such things or my intent motivation was contrary to actually finding Raxxla.
The second image however can be interpreted multiple ways, their cryptographic statement is interesting. But only in the fact that its open ended.
Again if I wanted to give a hint, one wouldn't simply show where it was, a large field shot, such as this, could be said to hold the location. A cryptically rye statement may also act as a compass barring... but again it lacks corroboration, considering the first image is so poor.
Within my profession we'd be inclinded to say this intelligence smells.
Personally if I wanted to confirm its discovery there are far more elaborate and imaginative ways of doing this, two grainy low quality screen shots is insufficient in my 'professional' opinion.
Of course they could be right.... but again there isn't sufficient information to warrent further assessment.