Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Can digital photographs be used in a court of law?

Reply
Thread Tools

Can digital photographs be used in a court of law?

 
 
Scotius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2010
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:13:05 +1000, Era <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I under stand that the "film" is acceptable but not digital ones?


That's because digital is so easily manipulatable, and has
been for some time.
It's been alleged that the "satellite photos" that US
government representatives showed their Saudi counterparts in
1990/1991 to get Saudi Arabia to back the invasion of Iraq showed
Iraqi battle formations on the Saudi border, except that they weren't
real.
That was '91, and tech has come quite a way since.
The Pentagon since at least the '90s could, if they wanted to,
beam down video of your regular nightly newscaster saying whatever
they want him to say. It would be someone reading a script who might
not look or sound anything like him, but with computer technology, you
see the guy you're accustomed to seeing saying whatever the mad
generals want you to hear.
Digital manipulation of digital video is quite easy; you do
NOT trust digital under any circumstances.
If I was watching someone on a video and I'm to make a
judgement about whatever, I want it to be tape or film, and I'd prefer
to see it as soon as possible, because even those can be messed with,
although it's not nearly as easy.
Tape you trust; digital you don't. It's simple.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2010
Scotius wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:13:05 +1000, Era <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I under stand that the "film" is acceptable but not digital ones?

>
> That's because digital is so easily manipulatable, and has
> been for some time.
> It's been alleged that the "satellite photos" that US
> government representatives showed their Saudi counterparts in
> 1990/1991 to get Saudi Arabia to back the invasion of Iraq showed
> Iraqi battle formations on the Saudi border, except that they weren't
> real.
> That was '91, and tech has come quite a way since.
> The Pentagon since at least the '90s could, if they wanted to,
> beam down video of your regular nightly newscaster saying whatever
> they want him to say. It would be someone reading a script who might
> not look or sound anything like him, but with computer technology, you
> see the guy you're accustomed to seeing saying whatever the mad
> generals want you to hear.
> Digital manipulation of digital video is quite easy; you do
> NOT trust digital under any circumstances.
> If I was watching someone on a video and I'm to make a
> judgement about whatever, I want it to be tape or film, and I'd prefer
> to see it as soon as possible, because even those can be messed with,
> although it's not nearly as easy.
> Tape you trust; digital you don't. It's simple.


Get out the Reynolds wrap and have at it.

And please don't plop already started threads into r.p.d.

--
lsmft
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Scotius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2010
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:01:55 -0500, George Kerby
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>
>On 7/12/10 1:32 AM, in article
>2010071123325636579-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
><savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-07-11 22:21:08 -0700, Scotius <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>
>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:13:05 +1000, Era <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I under stand that the "film" is acceptable but not digital ones?
>>>
>>> That's because digital is so easily manipulatable, and has
>>> been for some time.
>>> It's been alleged that the "satellite photos" that US
>>> government representatives showed their Saudi counterparts in
>>> 1990/1991 to get Saudi Arabia to back the invasion of Iraq showed
>>> Iraqi battle formations on the Saudi border, except that they weren't
>>> real.
>>> That was '91, and tech has come quite a way since.
>>> The Pentagon since at least the '90s could, if they wanted to,
>>> beam down video of your regular nightly newscaster saying whatever
>>> they want him to say. It would be someone reading a script who might
>>> not look or sound anything like him, but with computer technology, you
>>> see the guy you're accustomed to seeing saying whatever the mad
>>> generals want you to hear.
>>> Digital manipulation of digital video is quite easy; you do
>>> NOT trust digital under any circumstances.
>>> If I was watching someone on a video and I'm to make a
>>> judgement about whatever, I want it to be tape or film, and I'd prefer
>>> to see it as soon as possible, because even those can be messed with,
>>> although it's not nearly as easy.
>>> Tape you trust; digital you don't. It's simple.

>>
>> Why on earth did you bring this out of date 2005 thread back to life?
>>

>Our Troll is B-O-R-E-D and is again setting hooks...


I'm not a troll/don't be a twit.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scotius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2010
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:06:59 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
>drugs began to take hold. I remember Scotius <(E-Mail Removed)> saying
>something like:
>
>>That was '91, and tech has come quite a way since.
>> The Pentagon since at least the '90s could, if they wanted to,
>>beam down video of your regular nightly newscaster saying whatever
>>they want him to say. It would be someone reading a script who might
>>not look or sound anything like him, but with computer technology, you
>>see the guy you're accustomed to seeing saying whatever the mad
>>generals want you to hear.

>
>Paranoid bullshit.


Not according to the people who put together the intelligence
newsletter "For Your Eyes Only...", who are considered quite
professional in their field. Parts of that newsletter are often
reprinted in military/intelligence type magazines.
But you can think what you like.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wikipedia information used as evidence in court. Aardvark Computer Support 1 07-23-2009 02:02 AM
Can Groovy be used in an applet and/or can it generate the Java bytecodes that then can be used in an applet? Casey Hawthorne Java 1 03-18-2009 12:56 AM
Photo Preservation for Chemical and Digital Photographs (Product Info) Steven S. Digital Photography 10 11-08-2004 07:08 PM
Converting Film photographs to electronic photographs Rifleman Computer Support 18 06-09-2004 02:38 PM
In a Digital Age, Who Knows When Photographs Will Fade Ed Fortmiller Digital Photography 1 08-15-2003 02:26 PM



Advertisments