What’s is the supposed business case for sharing raw, unmodified 42Mpix photos?
And if they are still modified later on, and perhaps re-signed, that’s where I would attack.
I would assume they can sign both RAWs and JPEGs. I can imagine a hardened coprocessor that can sign things coming from the sensor and image processor, so you get signed RAW and/or JPEG and you can't extract the private keys. Any modification later on means it's no longer signed. Unless I'm missing something, this is pretty good until someone extracts or leaks the private keys. Maybe they came up with something much smarter :)
> What’s is the supposed business case for sharing raw, unmodified 42Mpix photos?
TFA (TFPR?) answers this.
"This technology is particularly applicable for passports and ID verification but goes further in tackling image manipulation in the media, medical and law enforcement fields. For the insurance and construction sectors, this technology will offer a secure foundation for inspection and recording of damage."
> And if they are still modified later on, and perhaps re-signed, that’s where I would attack.
Even so, the existence of an original capture makes post-capture attacks useless. An effective attack will modify the image before it's signed.
Well first you offer signed downsizing software that only runs on windows 11 with verified boot, then after a few more steps the only way to print (on the printer you purchased but also pay for ink and a monthly subscription service) or share the photo is via sony's $19.99/mo photo software or a subscription to lightroom.
If they did things correctly (and I assume a company like Sony did) then each camera will have its own signed certificates attributed to it. Yes you can sign fake pictures, but the signature won't be from the same camera, which is a pretty good mitigation against this.
I think rather than looking for a Linux flavour you want to look at various companies business models and size to see if it can sustain the ongoing cost of releasing and supporting a phone, OS, security patches etc.
So far, Apple still has a pretty low % of revenue coming from ads.
I don't mind them as long as the weight is balanced out with clamping force or higher up the band. There's even smaller sized cells which go into electric toothbrushes as well. The point is to have cells that can be sourced easily & replaced without much fuss which these LiPo packs do not enable.
I (and other) call Bs on classifying something as processed or ultra processed as inherently bad.
Baby formulas, workout premixes, and also home cooking are all forms of processed food.
It’s what you put in it and also at what ratio is what matters most.
If you get processed food that has all the good oils and fiber and proteins like YFood or Soylent that’s actually more healthy than say eating “unprocessed” fried potatoes for example.
Depending on the size of the company it can be simple or hard. Most companies that need this are not huge. Things like RDS, Elasticache, ECR and Secrets have multi AZ integrated so not hard to do it. If you operate on ECS or EKS it's pretty straightforward to boot up nodes and load balancers in another AZ.
Maybe you have a system that requires more hands on work and want to explain your point of view? I don't appreciate the snarky responses tho.
It’s really simple- real estate is the only casino where you are almost guaranteed a leveraged payout in the long run.
So as soon as houses became an investment, the way to maximise profit is not to go for the cheapest but for the most expensive house you can afford.
I thought people stopped thinking like this after 2008/9. If not, maybe 2023/24 will teach them. When people buy a house and sell for more, they don't include property tax, mortgage interest costs, maintenance costs in their mental calc of profit. Sometimes they include renovations costs, sometimes not. They also don't factor in their next house they buy is inflated too.
> I thought people stopped thinking like this after 2008/9
Why would they? It's not like it stopped in 2008. If you bought at the _peak_ in 2007 and held, in pretty much every area in the UK you're currently _way_ up, particularly if you leveraged yourself.
> When people buy a house and sell for more, they don't include property tax, mortgage interest costs, maintenance costs in their mental calc of profit. Sometimes they include renovations costs, sometimes not.
And people who make this argument often fail to consider the alternative costs, e.g.renting (which here in the UK is likely to be ~30% greater than the cost of mortgage interested to cover affordability checks), and leverage. You know what beats a 10% return on a 20k investment? A 100% return annually on a 20k investment.
For a £200k property in the UK, you could buy it in 2017 with a 20k downpayment, ~£1000 in fees, on a mortgage with 2% interest rates, and it would _very_ likely be worth £240+k right now even without any renevation work.
> They also don't factor in their next house they buy is inflated too.
You're assuming that people are selling to buy bigger houses, or that the rises are spread equally across all pricing bands. If you take my parents as an example, they bought a family home in late 80s/early 90s, sat on it for 30 years, and then downsized to a smaller home. The "inflation" of their house was far more than the inflation of the house they moved into. Also, the ceilings are loosely capped with earnings (since 2008 here at least) - stress tests for lending mean that in practice for the last few years, banks have been lending a maximum of 4.5-5.5x of borrowers income, so the cap is loosely set based on that.
A lot of people in the US who bought shortly before the US housing crash in 2008 paid a lot more money than what they can sell for. Sometimes they can't even get half.
This is plain false. I would love a zillow link to show one single example of a house in 2008 being worth more than it is today. Housing in most of the US is up 20-40 % in the last two years alone and the crash in 2008 was around 20-40%.
This is trivially easy: this home was sold in 2007 for 2.9m and was just recently solid for 1.8m 7 months ago. Top of market took a huge beating in 2007-2008.
I'd start by looking at places that had huge real estate bubbles like Las Vegas or are far enough away from anything interesting (like all the shitty Bay Area suburbs).
For a lot of not great reasons I've a condo in one of those shitty Bay Area suburbs. Four units in this complex were listed for sale this year. Two sold for a bit under 500k, and two are still asking well over 500. So yeah I'd say the upper bound currently is $500k. Pre-COVID prices were in the low 400s.
I've checked out the property tax bills for my neighbors, and, yes, some have an assessed value of well over $500k. They've been underwater for about a decade.
I never quite understood this, as housing is generally a market you can’t exit. So what’s the long term investment goal, to buy big now and downsize later for a profit?
Almost any beginner programming course states that algorithms are like recipes for a computer. Conversely a recipe is an algorithm meant for imperfect humans.
If a recipe isn’t code then what is ?
