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

Roc Camera

roc.camera

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 491 posts

Re: Roc Camera

#31

Post by modeless »

Seems to me that a camera like this is necessarily, at least in part, a closed system that blocks you from controlling the software or hardware on the device you supposedly own. It's hard for me to think this is a good direction. And as others have pointed out, it can't prevent attacks through the analog hole, e.g. photographing a display.

It's not feasible or desirable for our hardware devices to verify the information they record autonomously. A real solution to the problem of attribution in the age of AI must be based on reputation. People should be able to vouch for information in verifiable ways with consequences for being untrustworthy.

Re: Roc Camera

#32

Post by Fade_Dance »

padolsey wrote: post #22

What concerns me most in the era of gen AI irt photography is journalism. We need truth, most especially when limited-means citizen journalism is the only reliable source of that truth. But I feel like the only way to accomplish fool-proof photos we can trust in a trustless way (i.e. without relying on e.g. the Press Association to vet) is to utterly PACK the hardware with sensors and tamper-proof attestation so the…

This is probably one of those scenarios where if someone wants to fake it they're going to fake it (or at least it will be a never ending arms race, and I expect AI to keep close chase), while a basic security solution will suffice for 99% of use cases, including standard journalism. After all, skilled photoshop+computational tools can already do expert fakery in journalism. (Just look at the last Abroadinjapan video earlier today for a good callout of Photoshop editing to increase engagement).

Re: Roc Camera

#34

Post by nixpulvis »

Am I just a crazy cynic or are ZK proofs here just a buzzword.

Like, how is this any different than having each camera equipped with a vendor controlled key and then having it sign every photo?

If you can spoof the sensor enough to reuse the key, couldn't you spoof the sensor enough to fool a verifier into believing your false proof?

Re: Roc Camera

#35

Post by defrost »

sodality2 wrote: post #24
varenc wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What proof is there that the photo scanner is scanning a genuine photo and not something AI generated that looks like a Polaroid?

What proof is there that this camera is photographing a genuine scene? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_Fairies

If Elsie and Frances had the technology we could have a digitally signed zero knowledge proof that their photo's captured a genuine scene that included cardboard cutouts of fairies.

It was a real moment with objects that Bishop Berkeley could have kicked.

Re: Roc Camera

#36

Post by d_silin »

You can absolutely sign the image with the on-camera certificate, for example, but that would too boring of a solution to hype.

Re: Roc Camera

#37

Post by pabs3 »

drdaeman wrote: post #28
Gigachad wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't work at all as open source since you could just modify the source to sign your AI generated pictures.

This is patently incorrect. Just remember the whole TiVo affair and reasons why GPLv3 was born. Source code availability does not guarantee ability to run it on the particular device.

The Software Freedom Conservancy thinks the GPLv2 guarantees the ability to modify existing GPLv2 software on a device, but does not guarantee the ability to still use the proprietary software running on top of that, and that the same applies with GPLv3. Reading the preamble of the GPLv2, I'm inclined to agree with them. Hasn't been tested in court yet though I think.

https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017...

Re: Roc Camera

#38

Post by nixpulvis »

modeless wrote: post #31

Seems to me that a camera like this is necessarily, at least in part, a closed system that blocks you from controlling the software or hardware on the device you supposedly own. It's hard for me to think this is a good direction. And as others have pointed out, it can't prevent attacks through the analog hole, e.g. photographing a display. It's not feasible or desirable for our hardware devices to verify the informat…

I don't think reputation gets you that far alone, we already live in a world where misinformation spreads like wildfire through follower counts and page ranks.

The problem is quality takes time, and therefore loses relevance.

We need a way to break people out of their own human nature and reward delayed gratification by teaching critical thinking skills and promoting thoughtfulness.

I sadly don't see an exciting technological solution here. If anything it's tweaks to the funding models that control the interests of businesses like Instagram, Reddit, etc.

Post reply on HN