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

471–480 of 491 posts

Re: Roc Camera

#471

Post by nextlevelwizard »

jeswin wrote: post #171
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the stuff is off the shelf. Makes it way easier to develop. There is no reason to actually use RPi, compute module or not, as a base camera board (talking from experience) other than it is super easy to start with.

I disagree. If CM5 had the ability to sleep at tiny fractions of a watt, there are really practical and usable cameras you can pull off today, even when it's not the most efficient. For all the downsides, it would more than make up in the ease-of-development department. I believe if RPi6 adds sleep, you'd see a flurry of portable gadgets built on the platform.

Speed of development is fine for a prototype, but for an actual product it is just sloppy and wasteful. Problem isn’t even battery hungriness, but boot time. Users don’t want to wait 20-60 seconds for their camera to load an entire Linux kernel and drivers and then all the software you have gobbled together on top when you could be up and running almost instantly if you used microcontroller instead of cpu

Re: Roc Camera

#473

Post by nextlevelwizard »

intrasight wrote: post #431
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. What prevents you from printing out a AI generated picture and taking a photo of that with the camera?

Nothing. But I know it's you and not the New York Times publishing that photo. Now you get it?

So why would I buy this if you still wouldn’t trust my photos? And why would NYT when you already trust them? Who is the target audience?

Re: Roc Camera

#474

Post by nextlevelwizard »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #203
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I am just naive, but I don't see why taking a photo of a screen, projection, or print out would be hard. Wouldn't it just need even lighting and tripod? Adding something like a LIDAR and somehow baking that data into the meta data could be fun

Then people will connect their fake image and LIDAR feed to where the CMOS is connected. Like always with half-baked digital attestation chains, laypersons will argue "Oh, but who's gonna do that?" and the reality is that even private modders and hackers are perfectly willing and capable of doing this and will jump on it right away, and if it's just for the fun to distribute a certified picture of an alien giving eve…

I didn’t say adding extra sensors is some kind of magic bullet. I said adding LIDAR would be fun.

Re: Roc Camera

#475

Post by echelon »

t43562 wrote: post #142
echelon wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like pearl clutching. We do not need "proof". We lived without it, and we'll live without it again. I grew up before broadband - we survived without photographing every moment, too. It was actually kind of nice. Social media is the real fluke of our era, not image generation. And hypothetically if these cryptographic "non-AI really super serious real" verification systems do become in vogue, what happens i…

Back to the time before photographs then - the 1800s. Crime scene photographs won't be evidence anymore. You photograph your flat (apartment) when you move in to prove that all the marks on the walls were already there and that won't be evidence anymore. The police mistreat you but your video of it won't be evidence either. etc

> Crime scene photographs won't be evidence anymore.

Why wouldn't they be?

Testimony is evidence.

Re: Roc Camera

#476

Post by Rozoulay »

cma wrote: post #2

> Creates a Zero Knowledge (ZK) Proof of the camera sensor data and other metadatas How do you stop someone from taking a picture of an AI picture? It will still come from the sensor.

This is a known problem in this space called 're-broadcasting' do a Google patent search on Serelay and you'll see several solutions (including spoofing of other sensor metadata)

Re: Roc Camera

#477

Post by [deleted] »

cma wrote: post #2

> Creates a Zero Knowledge (ZK) Proof of the camera sensor data and other metadatas How do you stop someone from taking a picture of an AI picture? It will still come from the sensor.

[deleted]

Re: Roc Camera

#478

Post by intrasight »

nextlevelwizard wrote: post #473
intrasight wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing. But I know it's you and not the New York Times publishing that photo. Now you get it?

So why would I buy this if you still wouldn’t trust my photos? And why would NYT when you already trust them? Who is the target audience?

I didn't say that I didn't trust yours. It's that I trust the NYTimes more.

Re: Roc Camera

#479

Post by BeFlatXIII »

peteforde wrote: post #429
BeFlatXIII wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parable of the pottery classes that were graded on their best work and total volume of work springs to mind. I never would've bothered with photography if I didn't have the ability to be shameless with burst mode and pick the winners later.

What you are describing isn't photography.

[ citation needed ]

Re: Roc Camera

#480

Post by thegrimmest »

cardanome wrote: post #470
thegrimmest wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Observing and publishing a list of who goes into the abortion clinic is a perfect example of the exercise of free speech. You don’t need a public interest to do so. Restricting what I can publish is a violation of that exact idea. Free speech means you can say very nearly anything without criminal penalty (libel is a civil matter). My point is that the free people can do whatever they want, as long as they are not di…

Germany has historical experienced how fascists can weaponize free speech to gain power. One of the core tenants of modern Germany is to let this happen again. Now, we might not be doing well but certainly the US is currently doing much worse. You are already at the building camps stage and it is unclear whether you will have free elections for long. What is the point of theoretically having free speech for a migrant…

Making the lists is not the problem. It’s the rounding people up and sending them to camps that crosses the line. We already have laws about the circumstances required for citizens to be detained. Illegal aliens can be summarily deported, such were the risks they took when the broke the law to get here.

> for a women that might die during pregnancy because abortion was banned

To discuss abortion we would have to agree about things like "what is a person?". Many would reasonably argue that unborn children are humans too and therefore deserve their own freedom.

Allowing fascists to speak freely is the hallmark of a free society. Otherwise who gets to decide who the fascists are or are not? Free societies are free as a matter of principle, not as a matter of consequence.

”I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”

When Nazis marched through Skokie, Illinois in the 70s, it was Jewish lawyers who defended them. Being obsessed with liberty is a much better defence against tyranny than hoping the enormous government apparatus that determines who gets to speak and who does not will never be turned against you.

> someone writing that I visited an abortion clinic can do me harm

No they do not. Any person who reads what they wrote and decides to visit violence against you is doing you harm. Don’t shift blame away from violent actors, they make their own decisions. We already have laws about violence. You are not harmed by people simply knowing you had an abortion. It is a true fact about you.

Post reply on HN