401–410 of 491 posts
this is one of those things you shouldn't buy aside from novelty, but this idea wouldnt reach the light of day now without doing it this way
the real goal would be integration into more popular camera systems
I hope the founders and this concept gets all the support they are looking for
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have an entry level Sony Alpha that I picked up for a vacation earlier this year. With the portrait lens on there it definitely registers as “camera” far more than a phone. Between that factor and the hassle of having to manually go through and upload the photos afterward, I only take it on special occasions — trips, hikes, etc. It’s not worth all that hassle for trying to get day to day stuff.
I have a top of the line Sony Alpha (7CR) with a large zoom lens (24-70GM or 70-200GM) and I carry it almost everywhere, every day. It is absolutely worth the hassle to get day to day stuff.
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?
https://www.nikonusa.com/content/nikon-authenticity-service already exists?
I don't think ZK proofs help to establish trust in a photo's authenticity at all. C2PA is a well thought out solution to this problem. https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.2/spec... > The C2PA information comprises a series of statements that cover areas such as asset creation, edit actions, capture device details, bindings to content and many other subjects. These statements, called assertions, make…
https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?%2Farchives%2F10... (search his blog if you want more of his thoughts on it)
I don't have a know enough bout this but I've been reading his blog for other topics a while and he does seem to know a lot about photo authenticity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…
The contemporary “ick” about street photography is the ick of non-consensual capture. Everyone feels it to some degree; I stopped doing street photography work and even most social photography (including paid work) because I felt it and I wasn’t ready to navigate those feelings. This “ick” is real and it’s good that you feel it, because you can build on it for a sense of ethics about photos and the use of the camera,…
I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…
YOU are missing the mark on every front I can think of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…
> Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. I used to be a little into photography. No one ever protested about me taking a picture of them. Just recently I was photographing an event and thought: I just come there, take photos of everyone, upload them to the internet, and all I get is thanks. I haven't asked anyone for permission. Yes I was invited by…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People feel like there's some man in a dark room somewhere looking at each and every image posted everywhere with evil intent. Yeah when there's precedent for people doing exactly that the feeling is justified. How many times have we heard of [facebook employees/police/...] abusing their powers to stalk their [exes/wives/love interests/'enemies'/...]. With the amount of face detection and cataloguing being done tod…
In today's world, you can find one of anything. In the normal everyday world, no one is bothered.
People use that "one thing" and make a giant case out of it, sometimes affecting millions of people. I have two (of hundreds of) examples: 1) the Tylenol poisonings in 1982 Chicago, had Johnson & Johnson recall 31 million bottles of Tylenol, and arguably affected billions of people (with all the tamperproof packaging that resulted worldwide). This was a good thing. But one crazy man poisoning a few bottles of Tylenol at one grocery store affected many people.
2) The next example is somewhat personal, but at Boeing back around 1987 or so, one tech in our engineering group was on the production floor, and a huge steel roller cart with a tool on it, weighing probably 1000 lbs, ran over his toes. From that single incident (even though 1000's of workers and 1000's of heavy carts were being used daily for dozens of years), came an edict that ALL employees on or near these facilities had to mandatorily wear huge plastic toe-caps over their shoes if they didn't have steel-toed shoes on. This meant that even secretaries in nearby offices would have to wear these clunky caps all day, over their shoes even though they never entered the production facilities. One person's action affecting 50,000 nearby employees. This is a bad thing. (because of the huge over-reaction).
So, these maybe don't fit the perfect example we are discussing, but it shows how we can come to different conclusions based on different inputs: "you can find one of anything to use in an argument".