Timeline for Is generating random numbers using a smartphone camera a good idea?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 14, 2013 at 12:30 | comment | added | LateralFractal | Well, this is the difference between unique and random. Random is maths shorthand for unpredictable. Unique on the other hand can still be predictable. If you show me 99 photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, I can reasonably predict the 100th photo will be the Eiffel Tower. The byte content of each photo will naturally differ but majority of bits would be predictable both within the image and between images. Hence the need for a light-less capture or at least a completely unchanging image source - so the most obvious patterns can be avoided or stripped out. | |
| Sep 14, 2013 at 12:02 | comment | added | ian | Thanks for the detailed answer, I was unaware of the firmware issue, I'd already noticed a wide array of RAW formats though :/ On the subject of "Holder could recognise by sight, and yet could also deny was a key?" wouldn't any photo be, essentially, random? Time, subject, environment, camera, and angle would essentially make it a unique object (disregarding processing). Like this Dilbert comic search.dilbert.com/comic/Random%20Number%20Generator. | |
| Sep 14, 2013 at 11:55 | history | edited | LateralFractal | CC BY-SA 3.0 | grr more typos. shouldn't type in a dim room. |
| Sep 14, 2013 at 11:42 | history | answered | LateralFractal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |