There are only so many photos you can take!!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by chibitul, May 27, 2004.

  1. Funny that. That's my state in the morning.

    Dave Martindale, May 29, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. I plan to die long before then. I can't tell you exactly when, but I
    can safely say that the percent done indicator on this task would still
    be imperceptibly different from zero at that time.

    Dave Martindale, May 29, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. chibitul

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that (Dave Martindale) stated that:
    Same here, but I don't generally post to Usenet in the morning. ;)
    Lionel, May 29, 2004
  4. chibitul

    Dave Guest

    This somehow reminds me of the short story "Hardfought" by Greg Bear.
    Dave, May 29, 2004
  5. chibitul

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Even worse, you don't even need a camera. Computers can just generate
    every possible picture and it just becomes a matter of throwing out all
    of the bad ones.

    Given that computers can generate every possible picture, think about
    what that means. Every image possibly taken with a 6MP camera can be
    generated. EVERY image. A picture of the next big lottery winner.
    A picture of what you were doing with your girlfriend that night.
    A picture of the inside of a jet about to crash into the WTC. A
    picture of your great-grandaughter. They all can be generated.

    Of course, as is the case now, the hard part is separating the garbage
    from the gems. And, of course, convincing the government that a
    program that can possibly generate kidporn isn't illegal.
    Ray Fischer, May 29, 2004
  6. chibitul

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that (Ray Fischer) stated that:
    On the bright side, you'd also have a ton of blackmail photos on any
    possible government investigator or prosecutor.
    Lionel, May 30, 2004
  7. chibitul

    JPS Guest

    In message <1gegyha.1d12akw126utydN%>,
    Do you believe that there is a force in the universe that prevents
    chance from re-creating Shakespeare? That it is any less likely than
    any other string of characters of equal length, with equal ease of
    typing all sequences of characters?

    The querty keyboard would most likely reduce the chance of shakespeare
    somewhat due to simple pattern-ruts, but what about a device that
    scrambled the keycodes between each stroke? Do you think shakespeare
    would be any less likely than all "A"s?
    JPS, May 31, 2004
  8. chibitul

    JPS Guest

    In message <c95ge5$6ki$>,
    My eyes are hurting just thinking about it.
    JPS, May 31, 2004
  9. chibitul

    Paul Howland Guest

    Paul Howland, May 31, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.