I am a bit confused by Figure 3. Do they really have a surveillance camera angled just right to capture a photo of someone between the monitor and the wall that supports it?
OpenAI added a camera behind the TV after they found the bug (per the AP story [1]):
The company subsequently added a camera to the room that last week captured Alfozan entering and checking behind the television where the recording device was installed, according to the FBI.
Evidently it was an ESP32 with a wifi antenna. So it could instead/also have streamed to server. Or just used wifi for C+C. Total outlay for information worth millions to someone? Under $20.
That photo is from October 5th so several days after they found the device. They were guessing he might return most likely, and installed a camera. I think at this moment he realized they caught on. Crazy image
That's the accused speaking out loud after clearly noticing the newly installed spy camera: "Good god! Someone has put a recording device here. I would not have seen it had I not been feeling like dusting the back of this TV".
A good friend of mine manages installs of AV equipment. He installs some neat equipment. Some of it is cool tech stuff HN would like. He says a lot of conference rooms have video and audio recording devices.
Not trying to argue about this particular case but how does a camera footage even work in a modern court system? I mean it can be generated nowadays, so how do they even make sure that it is real?
The chain of evidence has always been attackable and necessary for evidence to be admissible in court. It was actually designed to allow reasonable doubt for tampering and other such things.
Photoshop has been around a lot longer than AI. And people have attempted to doctor all kinds of evidence in court since courts began
Here is a direct link to Figure 3:
https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bfl33...