• Richard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I am very opposed to this. It means surrendering all trust in pictures to Big Tech. If at some time only photos signed by Sony, Samsung, etc. are considered genuine, then photos taken with other equipment, e.g., independently manufactured cameras or image sensors, will be dismissed out of hand. If, however, you were to accept photos signed by the operating system on those devices regardless of who is the vendor, that would invalidate the entire purpose because everyone could just self-sign their pictures. This means that the only way to effectively enforce your approach is to surrender user freedom, and that runs contrary to the Free Software Movement and the many people around the world aligned with it. It would be a very dystopian world.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It would also involve trusting those corporations not to fudge evidence themselves.

      I mean, not everything photo related would have to be like this.

      But if you wanted you photo to be able to document things, to provide evidence that could send people to prison or be executed…

      The other choice is that we no longer accept photographic, audio or video evidence in court at all. If it can no longer be trusted and even a complete novice can convincingly fake things, I don’t see how it can be used.