Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

security.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 359 posts

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#201

Post by RobotToaster »

gambiting wrote: post #141
tempay wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the UK this seems to be a growing problem and jail isn't a scalable solution. See for example: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2rr9pg4jzo

Like a lot of things in the UK, the problem isn't the harshness of the law, it's the lack of prosecution. It doesn't matter what the punishment is when criminals know that the crime is extremely unlikely to be investigated or make it to trial.

> it's the lack of prosecution.

The UK allows private prosecution, if it was a real problem the insurance companies would be using it, instead of attempting to make the state pay for it.

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#202

Post by rickdeckard »

Topfi wrote: post #197
rickdeckard wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Doesn't OIS increase the size of a sensor by roughly half No, you can apply smartphone OIS-tech on any sensor, stabilization is achieved via the lens-array, not the sensor. The size of the module slightly increases but that's not a hindering factor. Cost/Benefit of OIS on ultra-wide lenses is not there, so it's usually not applied. > Your logic would lead to OEMs making SOCs without things like TEE and other things…

> I'm trying to answer why I don't see this happen, because I worked in this industry for more than 20 years. And despite that experience, you do not see the universal value in reliable, verifiable image attestation for any user? You cannot imagine why that may not just be very useful, but quickly become required, what the "end-user demand", "business-value" or "industry-requirements" could be?

This is not what I wrote and a very bad-faith statement of yours.

There is universal value in many features, yet they didn't become a commodity in all smartphone-tiers.

I don't see how and why this feature should become a default in all smartphones, which you keep insisting on without apparently comprehending the industry and market aspects I am trying to explain.

Peace.

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#203

Post by [deleted] »

rickdeckard wrote: post #202
Topfi wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm trying to answer why I don't see this happen, because I worked in this industry for more than 20 years. And despite that experience, you do not see the universal value in reliable, verifiable image attestation for any user? You cannot imagine why that may not just be very useful, but quickly become required, what the "end-user demand", "business-value" or "industry-requirements" could be?

This is not what I wrote and a very bad-faith statement of yours. There is universal value in many features, yet they didn't become a commodity in all smartphone-tiers. I don't see how and why this feature should become a default in all smartphones, which you keep insisting on without apparently comprehending the industry and market aspects I am trying to explain. Peace.

[deleted]

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#204

Post by HighGoldstein »

akersten wrote: post #38

The fundamental issue isn't technical. It's that people will see the "certified real" tag and just take the image for face value of whatever narrative someone wants to convey. They'll see the "Real Photo, Verified by Apple" and their brain will short circuit [0] I don't think we should have this, for that reason alone (but many others too). [0]: https://imgur.com/fVPkpuQ

The average person already does this with obvious AI slop.

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#205

Post by Topfi »

rickdeckard wrote: post #202
Topfi wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm trying to answer why I don't see this happen, because I worked in this industry for more than 20 years. And despite that experience, you do not see the universal value in reliable, verifiable image attestation for any user? You cannot imagine why that may not just be very useful, but quickly become required, what the "end-user demand", "business-value" or "industry-requirements" could be?

This is not what I wrote and a very bad-faith statement of yours. There is universal value in many features, yet they didn't become a commodity in all smartphone-tiers. I don't see how and why this feature should become a default in all smartphones, which you keep insisting on without apparently comprehending the industry and market aspects I am trying to explain. Peace.

What? Those three sentences are not really compatible with each other?! Like, they are mutually exclusive and each appears to hold a different position.

How is what I wrote (that you seem to not see universal benefit) in bad-faith/not what you wrote (honestly trying to understand what you mean) if you then add:

> I don't see how and why this feature should become a default in all smartphones [...]

So, do you see universal value or not? Cause you again said you do not and that was precisely what I wrote, that you do not seem to despite it being obvious to anyone who thinks about why phones of any price have cameras.

Should I honestly start writing a list why private as well as business users of smartphones may want, even need this? Is that really required? Consider every use case of a camera on a phone, please, before I feel the need to do that.

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#207

Post by grishka »

And why does someone have to trust Apple? Everything "security"-related that comes out of Apple lately somehow always assumes that Apple is to be unquestionably trusted.

And, yeah, I'm incredibly tired of this whole concept of a device you own acting in someone else's interests. This needs to stop and it needs to happen 10 years ago.

Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography

#209

Post by Retr0id »

setopt wrote: post #195
Retr0id wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EMPs are not "alien technology", and you don't need to be a nation state either. That said, Apple's hardware security is generally very good.

> EMPs are not "alien technology" Yup, you don’t even need nukes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compre...

or a bic lighter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezo_ignition
Post reply on HN