must agree with you. I much prefer the BSD-style-licenses in that I can someday make profit off of something that I spend countless hours working on.
Ok the is just one little problem. People in the business world using this stuff to do enterprise level work must be able to think that their products will still be around for a while without say the maintainer of bash suddently going commercial and making the product cost $1,000 per machine or something like that. I am not against this but aren't you already employed? I mean you had to get money while you were writing the thing in the first place so I assume you have a steady job. I guess it could be nice to have some means to get money if you were layed off or something but software that is produced by one person usually takes a little while to get spread around even if it is great (perl, gcc, etc).
I'll all for free software, and open source, but I'm all for paying the bills and eating as well.
Same with me. Usually however I invest my time in something that is a little bit surer because I don't like to loose bets that involve my house. It's just that most projects are seen as something that people do with their free time and not as their full time jobs so most people don't think that people are spending their full time working on their favorite project.
On a side note I still prefer the license Chat is released under, something along the lines of: "If this software breaks, you can keep both halves"
Is this the name of the program? I am not familiar with it. But I guess that implies that the product will come with no support from the developer right?
Who on Earth do you define as "most people"? I use as little GPL code as possible and certainly do not write it. I use the BSD License which is a lot more "free" than the GPL.
I don't mean everyone just a majority. People use the GPL because it protects the project and not just the interests of the developer developing it. If the developer dies, has problems, or is brainwashed he just can't take the project and run.
Using Gnu, or any other method or means to produce something, shouldn't make any difference as to whether someone can package it commercially. The time and creative effort to compose the package has to be worth something.
Althought I believe in what you are saying about developer time I think that this can work both in the same vein adom has both commercial features and features that are essentially free (the program has compiled versions for dos and linux x86) and allows for purtchessing of a commercial version for about $20 which allows for special features. This helps both causes: the developer, and the user.
Giving away a product on the premise that you can sell support is fine, if it can fly. But I'd rather have cash in hand.
Again this is fine. However if you want your product to fly if you are doing this freelance usually you get a wider audience if you use the GPL because concievably it could be included say in the next version of Debian or Red Hat.
The whole point of a movement be it communism, christianity, or that of jimmy's secret club is to have a world view which is compatable. Spies wear black suits and most people use the GNU/GPL.
More seriously I think that it will allow all changes to be free regardless of forking thus allowing all development to contribute to the whole. This is a model which supports project centric thinking versus developer centric or corporate centric thinking.
Having worked at Kinko's in the past, I can state for a fact that those color copiers break down at least once a week, if not more often. Though this does give you the opportunity to get to know the tech well enough so that they just teach you how to clear out various errors and perform repairs yourself so that they don't have to keep coming out to fix the stupid thing... BTW, it is legal to copy money and stamps (or it was a few years ago atleast) as long as you sufficiently distort it so that it can not be mistaken for real money.
From what I know you must have at least a 150% enlargement or shrink of the bill or coin or governmental issued certificate in question.
I think Java could only be helped by removing it from Sun's control.
And give it to whom? I have never heard of a language standard which was totally open source. The closest thing that get there is that wonderful godsend perl.
The difficulty with any language or standard which is controlled solely by a corporation which stands to profit from its control is that the company will naturally move to protect its control.
Well if they spend millions on the development they most likely feel that people should listen to such a person. They are feeling frightened about the prospect of having something like Visual J-- control the market and make the creators poorer than church mice.
Other companies (Microsoft!) will move to undermine control or use of that standard, regardless of technical merit.
That is the danger of Sun giving up it's control over the details because that will allow major competitors to take up the gauntlet and make it their little baby.
This only undermines the advance in computing technology as major corporations fight over market share rather than promoting the best tools available.
Well if Java is your cup of tea then go for it. What sun is trying to do it save their creation from the jowls of Microsoft. Do you just want another Visual Basic?
That's one way give a good uppercut to developers who are trusting you. So now Sun completely controls Java. They're reneged on their promises now that developers have put alot of time and effort into Java, because they believed in it, and they believed Sun was making their best effort to move it to a standardized base, and do things for the good of Java, which, in the end, is for the good of then.
Suddenly, *WHAM*. We need to protect our investment.
Goodbye good 'ole Sun, HELLO Microsoft II.
Big critical difference here. Microsoft loathes linux and any other OS with a passion. At least the JDK is avaible on a wider range of OS choices than DirectX or anything else that MS creates.
Look at the recent false story at slashdot to give away J++ to another company. It appears that Sun wants to add more goodies to it before it is set in stone. Might make things more interesting but could allow Microsoft to destroy that language through the typical embrace and extent mentality.
Re:sort of a return to the olden days...
on
IDs in Color Copies
·
· Score: 1
Sorry for being a little offtopic, here. Back in the day of manual typewriters (no electronic parts whatsoever) each typewriter had-- by virtue of the idiosyncrasies in letter alignment, imprint depth in paper, ribbon wear, etc.-- what amounted to a unique fingerprint. Many famous criminals (The ones that leap to mind are Leopold and Loeb, two precocious 14 year olds who read Nietzsche and then decided to kill an acquaintance so as to prove their status as Ubermenschen. This was back in the 1920s-- probably those violent 1st person video games that drove them to it) were tracked down because of their typewriter. It wasn't the most damning piece of evidence (one of the kids also dropped his glasses at the scene), but was none the less integral to the trial.
Suppose I am a writer and I say type about 20 pages or more a day. Wouldn't that eventually change the fingerprint slightly? What if I changed the ribbon? I guess I didn't use typewriters much (I made too many mistakes on them).
Older Canon copiers (CLC 1, 100, 200, 300, 500, 550, and 700/800) all will recoginze older US currency (and presumably other currency overseas) and produce a black/green mask over the copy. They will not, afak recognize stamps. Occasionally, they throw the mask on a specific green, combined with scroll patterns that trips the DSP's currency detector. Contrary to popular myth, these errors do not lock the copiers up, but they do produce an error, that is logged in the same place that jams and such are. Most companies require their technicians to report these errors and to cover behinds, such errors are reported to the Secret Service.
Alright so how does that stop people from counterfieting? Suppose I get a group of say 20 dollar bills and copy them off. I spend about 200 bucks worth of color copies to get my 50 $20 bills. Then I walk away. About 1 year later when the think breaks down and someone has to fix it they find that little error code in the copier's jam buffer and the tell the SS. So how do they determine who did it? Does it destinguish between types of currency or just a currency flag?
So now I can't even print my own money any more!? Jeese what is this world coming to!
I thought that all US currency was printed with magnetic ink and employed specilized paper with embedded red and blue fibers that was supposed to prevent counterfieting.
Same with printers, except there is lots of math involved to optimize the the non-linear ink jets and static attractions on laser jets. It all depends on how much time you want to spend tracing the process.
Just time in milliseconds the ammount of time it takes on something you know that dosn't have the watermark to something that does. The results even though small will indicate the presence of a watermark in terms of actions. Then you could correlate the ammount of time the printer takes to process pixels of the type that are used in various areas and then you will have a pretty good idea of what the image is and what it looks like. Or perhaps an X-ray analysis for change in the internal pattern of the image could yield something.
many of the large chains give you a big hassle about copying regular itmes, much less money. The debit cards they so frequently use for convenience (and they are more convenient than change) can also be used for identification.
Funny I have used copiers at various places (such as libraries) and have never been hassled before in my life.
As an artist, I've had copy places refuse to let me make photocopies of my own work because they were worried about copyright violations (I just couldn't convince them that i had in fact created the work in the first place!)...
A little bit of both. Some of the components in a copier have a 'useful life' and wear out. Of course these parts are only available from a factory authorized service rep! On top of that, they tend to use specialty fasteners in a lot of places, and the combination of compactness and complexity makes them extremely difficult to service yourself.
Are there any books like Copier Repair for Dummies?
Truth is, I rarely print -- I just lose paper. I would only consider printing something in color at a service bureau, where they have better printers than I could afford.
Paper is I would think more permanent than digital media. Basically cdroms have a useful life of about 5 years and other media are worse. Digital portable devices are a pipedream and are quite expensive and limited for all needs. So I use paper for the truely interactive nature of it. Making notes, keeping your place, etc. Quite nice and collectible.
So how would they 'watermark'? I doubt they would actually try to change the paper in the process, or before the printing. (If this were practical, I'm sure they would have done something like this for the new 'big head' currency.(Not that the new currency is so secure - Microsoft license certs are WAY more secure.)) Most likely, they would insert some 'DNA' into the ink. A few years ago, I remember hearing a plan to insert a serial number into gunpowder: Tiny strands of colored plastic that used a system like that that is used on electrical resistors to display the resistance would be put into each batch of gunpowder. While not universally unique, it could help identify the store where a bullet was purchased and, with credit card records, a list of potential suspects in a crime. Add one long number to each color and you have a pretty identifiable watermark. Hell, putting one digit on golf balls has been pretty useful for decades...
Basically just use a stenographic appraoch and make it "really, really, hard to remove".
So I guess they would code the ink. Anyone got any formulas for ink? Roll your own. For what they charge for ink, I'm surprised that this practice isn't already common. The reason you can buy a color printer for so cheap is that they charge so much for the ink cubes. Was it Gilette that said 'Give away the razor - charge for the blades...'? Whatever system they choose, I think the answer will not be to try to remove the watermark, rather to obfuscate it by inserting lots of your own 'reference numbers' in your printing. Kind of like covering the back of your car with your huge collection of out-of-state license plates. Could they effectively stop something like this?
That's a real laugh. So they encode the ink? I think the original ink that was used was derived from minerals, plants, and simple chemicals that were combined together. Anything can act as an ink: peanut butter for example. It's just a matter of how good it is. Take inkjet ink. They have watersoluable ink now that starts to run and smear the minute the smallest ammount of water comes in contact with the ink. This makes for some rather messy results if you get caught out in the rain.
There are techniques for hiding information into pictures. For example, some pgp 2.6.1 rpm's distribution comes with some stuff for this. If this was done, I don't know how you could remove it. Perhaps changing the image format a few times would remove it (and picture quality) from the conversions.
The term is stenography. You can hide any data in any other data by making it difficult to see and most people will not notice it.
I guess now we know in part at least why Photoshop is so expensive. It comes with a troop of spooks and enforcers.
Funny how this is brought up because I think I saw that bill gates borg thing on an acquaintaince's site before slashdot started using it. Just a thought.
You bring up an interesting point, what would this do to the paid copying industry. Any documents would be tracable to kinkos, not the copier. Come to think of it what if you sell your copier?
This is technology that Adobe licensed from Digimarc.. One of Digimarc's services they offer is you pay them some money and they report any use of your image they found on the web. By keeping an eye on my logs, I've noticed their crawlers perusing my server several times. Though all of the images on my site are mine (MINE MINE MINE!), I still don't like this idea.
I would just go talk with them and basically say that if they did not stop prowling your server that you would get an injunction and make them stop. No one has a "right" to look at anything on your server without your permission in such a way. The same is true with someone videotaping you, or recording your voice without your permission.
I wonder what sorts of transformations these technologys are impervious to.. Since they're looking for on the web for watermarked graphics, presumably colour reduction (gif) and/or jpeg compression artifacts don't disrupt things. Will a slight blur or rotation? Can you embed an extractable watermark on white noise?
I would think that a more "high tech" version of an image file would work nicely for example jpeg 2000 or the png format. Just spruce up the image using various things. Or change the gama correction so that it will work.
All sufficiently complex copiers require manufacturer service, as the manufacturers are loathe to give up the lucrative service contracts. The owner of a particular ID is therefore known to the manufacturer by-way of the machine serial number. Even if the manufacturer can't tell you who currently owns the machine (if it is not being serviced) they can tell you the serial number of the machine that produced the copy.
Does that mean that they are always breaking down or that they force you to have them serviced or is it that they are impossible to fix by yourself?
If it did, wouldn't people get hosed by innocently copying an envelope for the address information?
What if I just want copies of my private stamp collection so that I can show people what I have without risking it? If you invest several thousand dollars in stamps you don't want them stolen.
Canon color lasers (800, 1000, 2400, ect.) all have a board that recognizes things like money and postage stamps. If you try and copy any of these it will spit out all black copies, and will continue to do so until a Canon tech is called. (They usualy call the Secret Service)
Actually sounds like fun. Maybe I will try it and get back to you (with a desguise of course). I doubt it.
At one point [Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu's] censors intercepted some anonymous letters addressed to Radio Free Europe, criticizing the Ceausescus' 'personality cult.' In a fit of rage, Ceausescu ordered his security chiefs to get samples of the handwriting of every school child and adult Romanian, so that their handwriting experts could identify who had written the letters.
Additionally, he wanted every typewriter owned by the state registered with the Securitate, along with a sample of its type.
--Dr. James McCollum (Is Communism Dead Forever?)
What is interesting is that this is the same dictator who was finally ousted by the people after he failed to suppress a coup attempt against him and the media caught wind of it.
The US government has already shot people in this situation. Liberty scares the shit out of them.
Alright maybe I have a little chip on the shoulder from being mass de-moderated yesterday but just who, and when, and under what circumstances was a person in any way and who had any type of importance was actually killed by individuals who represented the United States government.
Slashdot Mirror
must agree with you.
I much prefer the BSD-style-licenses in that I can someday make profit off of something that I spend countless hours working on.
Ok the is just one little problem. People in the business world using this stuff to do enterprise level work must be able to think that their products will still be around for a while without say the maintainer of bash suddently going commercial and making the product cost $1,000 per machine or something like that. I am not against this but aren't you already employed? I mean you had to get money while you were writing the thing in the first place so I assume you have a steady job. I guess it could be nice to have some means to get money if you were layed off or something but software that is produced by one person usually takes a little while to get spread around even if it is great (perl, gcc, etc).
I'll all for free software, and open source, but I'm all for paying the bills and eating as well.
Same with me. Usually however I invest my time in something that is a little bit surer because I don't like to loose bets that involve my house. It's just that most projects are seen as something that people do with their free time and not as their full time jobs so most people don't think that people are spending their full time working on their favorite project.
On a side note I still prefer the license Chat is released under, something along the lines of:
"If this software breaks, you can keep both halves"
Is this the name of the program? I am not familiar with it. But I guess that implies that the product will come with no support from the developer right?
Who on Earth do you define as "most people"?
I use as little GPL code as possible and certainly do not write it. I use the BSD License which is a lot more "free" than the GPL.
I don't mean everyone just a majority. People use the GPL because it protects the project and not just the interests of the developer developing it. If the developer dies, has problems, or is brainwashed he just can't take the project and run.
Using Gnu, or any other method or means to produce something, shouldn't make any difference as to whether someone can package it commercially. The time and creative effort to compose the package has to be worth something.
Althought I believe in what you are saying about developer time I think that this can work both in the same vein adom has both commercial features and features that are essentially free (the program has compiled versions for dos and linux x86) and allows for purtchessing of a commercial version for about $20 which allows for special features. This helps both causes: the developer, and the user.
Giving away a product on the premise that you can sell support is fine, if it can fly. But I'd rather have cash in hand.
Again this is fine. However if you want your product to fly if you are doing this freelance usually you get a wider audience if you use the GPL because concievably it could be included say in the next version of Debian or Red Hat.
The whole point of a movement be it communism, christianity, or that of jimmy's secret club is to have a world view which is compatable. Spies wear black suits and most people use the GNU/GPL.
More seriously I think that it will allow all changes to be free regardless of forking thus allowing all development to contribute to the whole. This is a model which supports project centric thinking versus developer centric or corporate centric thinking.
Having worked at Kinko's in the past, I can state for a fact that those color copiers break down at least once a week, if not more often. Though this does give you the opportunity to get to know the tech well enough so that they just
teach you how to clear out various errors and perform repairs yourself so that they don't have to keep coming out to fix the stupid thing... BTW, it is legal to copy money and stamps (or it was a few years ago atleast) as long as you
sufficiently distort it so that it can not be mistaken for real money.
From what I know you must have at least a 150% enlargement or shrink of the bill or coin or governmental issued certificate in question.
I think Java could only be helped by removing it from Sun's control.
And give it to whom? I have never heard of a language standard which was totally open source. The closest thing that get there is that wonderful godsend perl.
The difficulty with any language or standard which is controlled solely by a corporation which stands to profit from its control is that the company will naturally move to protect its control.
Well if they spend millions on the development they most likely feel that people should listen to such a person. They are feeling frightened about the prospect of having something like Visual J-- control the market and make the creators poorer than church mice.
Other companies (Microsoft!) will move to undermine control or use of that standard, regardless of technical merit.
That is the danger of Sun giving up it's control over the details because that will allow major competitors to take up the gauntlet and make it their little baby.
This only undermines the advance in computing technology as major corporations fight over market share rather than promoting the best tools available.
Well if Java is your cup of tea then go for it. What sun is trying to do it save their creation from the jowls of Microsoft. Do you just want another Visual Basic?
That's one way give a good uppercut to developers who are trusting you. So now Sun completely controls Java. They're reneged on their promises now that developers have put alot of time and effort into Java, because they believed
in it, and they believed Sun was making their best effort to move it to a standardized base, and do things for the good of Java, which, in the end, is for the good of then.
Suddenly, *WHAM*. We need to protect our investment.
Goodbye good 'ole Sun, HELLO Microsoft II.
Big critical difference here. Microsoft loathes linux and any other OS with a passion. At least the JDK is avaible on a wider range of OS choices than DirectX or anything else that MS creates.
Look at the recent false story at slashdot to give away J++ to another company. It appears that Sun wants to add more goodies to it before it is set in stone. Might make things more interesting but could allow Microsoft to destroy that language through the typical embrace and extent mentality.
Sorry for being a little offtopic, here. Back in the day of manual typewriters (no electronic parts whatsoever) each typewriter had-- by virtue of the idiosyncrasies in letter alignment, imprint depth in paper, ribbon wear, etc.-- what
amounted to a unique fingerprint. Many famous criminals (The ones that leap to mind are Leopold and Loeb, two precocious 14 year olds who read Nietzsche and then decided to kill an acquaintance so as to prove their status as
Ubermenschen. This was back in the 1920s-- probably those violent 1st person video games that drove them to it) were tracked down because of their typewriter. It wasn't the most damning piece of evidence (one of the kids also
dropped his glasses at the scene), but was none the less integral to the trial.
Suppose I am a writer and I say type about 20 pages or more a day. Wouldn't that eventually change the fingerprint slightly? What if I changed the ribbon? I guess I didn't use typewriters much (I made too many mistakes on them).
Older Canon copiers (CLC 1, 100, 200, 300, 500, 550, and 700/800) all will recoginze older US currency (and presumably other currency overseas) and produce a black/green mask over the copy. They will not, afak recognize
stamps.
Occasionally, they throw the mask on a specific green, combined with scroll patterns that trips the DSP's currency detector.
Contrary to popular myth, these errors do not lock the copiers up, but they do produce an error, that is logged in the same place that jams and such are. Most companies require their technicians to report these errors and to cover
behinds, such errors are reported to the Secret Service.
Alright so how does that stop people from counterfieting? Suppose I get a group of say 20 dollar bills and copy them off. I spend about 200 bucks worth of color copies to get my 50 $20 bills. Then I walk away. About 1 year later when the think breaks down and someone has to fix it they find that little error code in the copier's jam buffer and the tell the SS. So how do they determine who did it? Does it destinguish between types of currency or just a currency flag?
So now I can't even print my own money any more!? Jeese what is this world coming to!
I thought that all US currency was printed with magnetic ink and employed specilized paper with embedded red and blue fibers that was supposed to prevent counterfieting.
Same with printers, except there is lots of math involved to optimize the the non-linear ink jets and static attractions on laser jets. It all depends on how much time you want to spend tracing the process.
Just time in milliseconds the ammount of time it takes on something you know that dosn't have the watermark to something that does. The results even though small will indicate the presence of a watermark in terms of actions. Then you could correlate the ammount of time the printer takes to process pixels of the type that are used in various areas and then you will have a pretty good idea of what the image is and what it looks like. Or perhaps an X-ray analysis for change in the internal pattern of the image could yield something.
many of the large chains give you a big hassle about copying regular itmes, much less money. The debit cards they so frequently use for convenience (and they are more convenient than change) can also be used for identification.
Funny I have used copiers at various places (such as libraries) and have never been hassled before in my life.
As an artist, I've had copy places refuse to let me make photocopies of my own work because they were worried about copyright violations (I just couldn't convince them that i had in fact created the work in the first place!)...
I find that quite suprising which place was this?
A little bit of both. Some of the components in a copier have a 'useful life' and wear out. Of course these parts are only available from a factory authorized service rep! On top of that, they tend to use specialty fasteners in a lot of places,
and the combination of compactness and complexity makes them extremely difficult to service yourself.
Are there any books like Copier Repair for Dummies?
Truth is, I rarely print -- I just lose paper.
I would only consider printing something in color at a service bureau, where they have better printers than I could afford.
Paper is I would think more permanent than digital media. Basically cdroms have a useful life of about 5 years and other media are worse. Digital portable devices are a pipedream and are quite expensive and limited for all needs. So I use paper for the truely interactive nature of it. Making notes, keeping your place, etc. Quite nice and collectible.
So how would they 'watermark'? I doubt they would actually try to change the paper in the process, or before the printing. (If this were practical, I'm sure they would have done something like this for the new 'big head' currency.(Not
that the new currency is so secure - Microsoft license certs are WAY more secure.))
Most likely, they would insert some 'DNA' into the ink. A few years ago, I remember hearing a plan to insert a serial number into gunpowder: Tiny strands of colored plastic that used a system like that that is used on electrical
resistors to display the resistance would be put into each batch of gunpowder. While not universally unique, it could help identify the store where a bullet was purchased and, with credit card records, a list of potential suspects in a
crime.
Add one long number to each color and you have a pretty identifiable watermark. Hell, putting one digit on golf balls has been pretty useful for decades...
Basically just use a stenographic appraoch and make it "really, really, hard to remove".
So I guess they would code the ink. Anyone got any formulas for ink? Roll your own. For what they charge for ink, I'm surprised that this practice isn't already common. The reason you can buy a color printer for so cheap is that
they charge so much for the ink cubes. Was it Gilette that said 'Give away the razor - charge for the blades...'?
Whatever system they choose, I think the answer will not be to try to remove the watermark, rather to obfuscate it by inserting lots of your own 'reference numbers' in your printing. Kind of like covering the back of your car with your
huge collection of out-of-state license plates. Could they effectively stop something like this?
That's a real laugh. So they encode the ink? I think the original ink that was used was derived from minerals, plants, and simple chemicals that were combined together. Anything can act as an ink: peanut butter for example. It's just a matter of how good it is. Take inkjet ink. They have watersoluable ink now that starts to run and smear the minute the smallest ammount of water comes in contact with the ink. This makes for some rather messy results if you get caught out in the rain.
There are techniques for hiding information into pictures. For example, some pgp 2.6.1 rpm's distribution comes with some stuff for this. If this was done, I don't know how you could remove it. Perhaps changing the image format a
few times would remove it (and picture quality) from the conversions.
The term is stenography. You can hide any data in any other data by making it difficult to see and most people will not notice it.
I guess now we know in part at least why Photoshop is so expensive. It comes with a troop of spooks and enforcers.
Funny how this is brought up because I think I saw that bill gates borg thing on an acquaintaince's site before slashdot started using it. Just a thought.
You bring up an interesting point, what would this do to the paid copying industry. Any documents would be tracable to kinkos, not the copier. Come to think of it what if you sell your copier?
Most likely make them act like natzis.
This is technology that Adobe licensed from Digimarc.. One of Digimarc's services they offer is you pay them some money and they report any use of your image they found on the web. By keeping an eye on my logs, I've noticed
their crawlers perusing my server several times. Though all of the images on my site are mine (MINE MINE MINE!), I still don't like this idea.
I would just go talk with them and basically say that if they did not stop prowling your server that you would get an injunction and make them stop. No one has a "right" to look at anything on your server without your permission in such a way. The same is true with someone videotaping you, or recording your voice without your permission.
I wonder what sorts of transformations these technologys are impervious to.. Since they're looking for on the web for watermarked graphics, presumably colour reduction (gif) and/or jpeg compression artifacts don't disrupt things. Will
a slight blur or rotation? Can you embed an extractable watermark on white noise?
I would think that a more "high tech" version of an image file would work nicely for example jpeg 2000 or the png format. Just spruce up the image using various things. Or change the gama correction so that it will work.
All sufficiently complex copiers require manufacturer service, as the manufacturers are loathe to give up the lucrative service contracts. The owner of a particular ID is therefore known to the manufacturer by-way of the machine serial
number. Even if the manufacturer can't tell you who currently owns the machine (if it is not being serviced) they can tell you the serial number of the machine that produced the copy.
Does that mean that they are always breaking down or that they force you to have them serviced or is it that they are impossible to fix by yourself?
If it did, wouldn't people get hosed by innocently copying an envelope for the address information?
What if I just want copies of my private stamp collection so that I can show people what I have without risking it? If you invest several thousand dollars in stamps you don't want them stolen.
Canon color lasers (800, 1000, 2400, ect.) all have a board that recognizes things like money and postage stamps. If you try and copy any of these it will spit out all black copies, and will continue to do so until a Canon tech is
called. (They usualy call the Secret Service)
Actually sounds like fun. Maybe I will try it and get back to you (with a desguise of course). I doubt it.
At one point [Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu's] censors intercepted some anonymous letters addressed to Radio Free Europe, criticizing the Ceausescus' 'personality cult.' In a fit of rage, Ceausescu ordered
his security chiefs to get samples of the handwriting of every school child and adult Romanian, so that their handwriting experts could identify who had written the letters.
Additionally, he wanted every typewriter owned by the state registered with the Securitate, along with a sample of its type.
--Dr. James McCollum (Is Communism Dead Forever?)
What is interesting is that this is the same dictator who was finally ousted by the people after he failed to suppress a coup attempt against him and the media caught wind of it.
I'm gonna patent this anti watermarking technique. :)
:)
Too late I thought about this in 1986. Sorry I guess you will have to pay me a royalty fee of about $5,000 per use now
The US government has already shot people in this situation. Liberty scares the shit out of them.
Alright maybe I have a little chip on the shoulder from being mass de-moderated yesterday but just who, and when, and under what circumstances was a person in any way and who had any type of importance was actually killed by individuals who represented the United States government.