Live data from Hacker News

Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

dkriesel.com

1–10 of 63 posts

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#6
post #4

Please add (2913) to the title: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Xerox%20scanners%20randomly%20... Edit: oops, 2013 - typed on my smartphone without reading back :)

Hello time traveler. I think you mean 2013 :-)

You missed the joke

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#7
Other recent related submissions/discussions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34815391 - "Xerox copier flaw changes numbers in scanned docs (2013)" (theregister.com), 36 points, 3 months ago, 8 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32537073 - "JBIG2 Undetectable Data Corruption: Destroying Our Past, One Character at a Time" (circuitousroot.com), 67 points, 9 months ago, 34 comments

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#8
Even though this happened a long time ago, whenever I hear or think about it, I am a mazed that it didn't put Xerox out of business, or at least hurt a little more. After all, some big players were already doing digital archiving at the time. :-/ BTW, the CCC had a pretty neat presentation at that time as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#9
post #8

Even though this happened a long time ago, whenever I hear or think about it, I am a mazed that it didn't put Xerox out of business, or at least hurt a little more. After all, some big players were already doing digital archiving at the time. :-/ BTW, the CCC had a pretty neat presentation at that time as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo

Maybe, these – the demise of Xerox not happening and the size of the players involved – are related? As in: none wants their archives and data bases put in question? (Meaning, in order to claim damages, you'd have to admit that there is damage, indeed.)
Post reply on HN