| ▲ | Ajedi32 3 hours ago |
| Who posts raw output from cameras anywhere? This doesn't seem useful outside some niche use-cases (like security camera footage). At a minimum just about every recording is going to be re-compressed for streaming. |
|
| ▲ | mapontosevenths 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Synthid and the like survive compression and decent quality rerecording. |
|
| ▲ | AmbroseBierce 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I bet the cameras' companies will start automatically uploading the real footage to their servers for attestation, and allow the camera owners to get those links, so people will just add that link on YouTube or whatever and say "See, its real, Sony vouches for it", heck maybe they will make their buyers to sign up with YouTube and do it for them. |
| |
| ▲ | thfuran 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How on top of security do you think all the camera manufacturers are going to be? That is, how long until people can sign videos that were not, in fact, shot with their camera? | | |
| ▲ | AmbroseBierce 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Proving that you were able to upload something that is not real would go viral so it's very attractive to people to share such findings, meaning it would not last long, then they fix it and that's it, specially because they can require you to upgrade your camera's firmware if you want to keep using their attestation service. | | |
| ▲ | pixl97 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Depends on what kind of compromise occurs. Hardware level key loss isn't easy, if possible at all to fix. |
|
| |
| ▲ | prirun 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Only if you're paying them | | |
| ▲ | AmbroseBierce 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Attention is valuable these days, so making people go to their websites for people to check if something is real is good for them, its people they can try to sell more cameras (or phones) and all that. |
| |
| ▲ | exe34 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They can attest pictures of my hairy pendulous ballsack. | | |
| ▲ | AmbroseBierce 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Joking and all but sexting would benefit from this technology, if it can vouch about the time, GPS location and email address of the owner then the receiver can have some certainty about the pic (if the sender decides to share such attestation link/info, of course) |
|
|
|
| ▲ | scoofy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't think it needs do be raw output. I'm pretty sure that signatures can exist within image and sound outputs that are reproducible when changing to other formats. |
|
| ▲ | paulddraper 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Yeah I’m not sure this makes sense when images are getting their third ifunny watermark. |
