Or maybe I'm old, crotchety and cynical too, and also aware just how big a pain in the arse achieving more than one-off anonymity would be.
But shit, one-off? Fucking hell, just catch a train into London. They'll know it's one of the 11 million people in the city that week, so I guess it's not truly anonymous, but it's close enough.
When fires are set to intentionally cause people to flee from their homes (allowing the arsonist to loot them) they're going to spread.
Sure, you can model that spread too. But even there, when the model will apply to the known environment, which is wrong: there were illegal buildings of which the authorities were unaware, could thus not have included in the model, and that would thus have led to unmodelled outcomes.
In short, the Greeks were fucked anyway and I'm suspicious of the motives of the person claiming otherwise.
If you leak NSA secrets using a pseudonym we still don't know who you are and the Government can't (necessarily) find and hurt you. We can however ascertain the likelihood of your leaks being accurate based on your history of leaking.
Some people on Slashdot disregard everything I say, because they're aware of my identity here and dislike things I've said in the past. That's a form of repercussion; my behaviour has lessened my influence with them. That doesn't mean that they know who am I, where I live, who I work for, what I stuck my cock into last night.
Should I have had to put myself and family at risk of that when I captured a video of a serious rights violation by an officer?
No, but it would be lovely if you could share that video using some form of identity that lets lawyers, journalists and others contact and engage with you to verify its validity and provide support in pursuit of justice.
Cool. A desktop computer with a few "phone" processes that you can't get rid of, just like I can't get rid of them on my tablet. And a "location manager" that runs 24/7.
Ah, I see you've used the Microsoft Surface hardware too!
Shit, the UK didn't have a minimum wage in the 80s and in the 90s I was working for less than $3.10/hour.
But hey, keep judging people by your own income level. Doesn't change the very substantial shift downwards in the cost of photography in the last 40 years.
Black people reflect less light, and detail is less-obvious.
I have noticed that I find it a lot harder to photograph people with dark skin. Facial features don't easily stand out from shadows and there's far less skin texture visible.
In controlled conditions it's a non-issue but for candid photography it's a big problem:(
they realize that being openly racist turns a lot of people off so they moderate their language and use dog whistles
This might have some semblance of credibility if every single cry of 'dog whistle' wasn't either a chan related wind up or demonstrating the blatant bigotry of the person making the claim.
Twitter is merely perpetuates and accentuates the bigotry through its horrifically biased review mechanisms.
Leica sell a mirrorless camera that lets you focus using an optical viewfinder.
Most of the other manufacturers let you use focus peaking. I find that far easier to use than a DSLR to really pick my focus point and its superiority increases as I get older and my eyesight starts to go.
Then there's the digital zoom that lets you pick just a segment of the image to fill the viewfinder/LCD and assess the zoom.
But hey, I'll acknowledge that I take a lot of out of focus photographs. That's mainly because I take a lot of photographs and/or forget I've left the camera in manual focus. It's rare that I fail to get an in-focus photograph of a subject at all - and when I do, it's usually fast moving wildlife that isn't going to piss around waiting for me to manually focus anyway.
In short, mirrorless manual focussing is every bit as good as SLR for me, if not better.
Yeah, I know what you mean. My mirrorless camera dropped to 63% battery remaining after just 600 photographs last week.
Maybe if I'd switched the LCD screen off and used the viewfinder I could've got more? Or maybe if I want to take more than 2500 photographs in a day I should invest in the battery grip, rather than just carrying around a second battery as I do now.
As for the heat, well, it's a good job I change lenses occasionally and let the heat out. Shooting in 36C heat in Malta was clearly impacting the camera's operator.
However, my 1 series with a solid roof did fuck up completely in icy conditions: the window would open a little, then refuse to close because of the ice.
Far more useful was the 'hit the unlock button twice and the windows will open halfway when you open the door' feature. That made getting in and out of the car much easier in tight parking spaces.
or just another white guy on a sex trip in Thailand?
What the fuck does his race have to do with anything? Why would being on a 'sex trip' have anything to do with paedophilia? Wait? You think sex trips in Thailand are for paedophiles? That tells us much more about you than Thailand.
Most people in the UK would associate Thailand with ladyboys, the fucking of whom is perfectly legal in the UK and in Thailand. Not to mention a fine cabaret act: https://www.ladyboysofbangkok....
Elon Musk just sent something in part in response to prompting by people on Twitter.
No, he also engaged heavily with the media to promote himself and his business interests, exploiting vulnerable children for his own benefit.
He then defamed an individual in a way that's caused lasting damage to that person's reputation. For evidence, read your own fucking post.
It's a tricky situation for a manufacturer. They need to include enough room in the wholesale price for retailers to make a profit, but that then opens space for other retailers to treat a product as a loss-leader (or otherwise accept low margins), which distorts the online market for that product.
Consumers can find and will buy at the lowest price (ish, subject to laziness, trust in the retailer, shipping costs and other factors) so if something is available everywhere within a 10% spread and someone else has it 30% cheaper, the other retailers wont get the sales.
The manufacturer has limited options available within the law, and why I always check a manufacturer's own online shop when buying electronics. Several of them effectively price match the cheapest online retailer and/or throw in additional incentives.
Entirely irrelevant. If both companies gain by complying with the agreement they've made, they will continue to comply, even if (and usually causing) consumers lose out.
What you're failing miserably to comprehend is that all the signal processing, image processing, manipulation of the data captured from the sensor is entirely fucking irrelevant.
You can do all of it the same way on data captured from any sensor. It's a constant.
The variable becomes the pixel size of the sensor, and my point is that the larger this is, the more light it can capture, and the better quality image you will get as a result.
Try to understand what I'm talking about
I understand quite well enough. You're a megapixel count queen and think software and/or multiple exposures can compensate for shitty sensor size. I've demonstrated pretty comprehensively that it can not.
allowing us to reset the nose floor between identical exposures
I like my photographs to work from a single exposure. A bird wont take a fish from water multiple times in a row to allow you to capture multiple identical exposures and eliminate the noise as the difference between them.
Just doing a longer exposure doesn't help you much determine what is Galaxy and what is a photon hitting the sensor.
The photons come from the fucking galaxy. A longer exposure does indeed allow you to receive more light from the galaxy, or star, or reflection of light off a sea eagle in its dive.
Of course, that sea eagle is moving quite quickly, which is why bigger pixels allowing more of that reflected light to be captured in a shorter timespan are so fucking useful.
NASA specifically created a technique for eliminating sensor noise by making sub-pixel shifts in the camera
My camera can use sub-pixel shifts in the sensor too but that's still fuck all use with moving subjects, or when you don't want to sit there waiting.
I use the same technique when I image galaxies to great effect
You don't even need to use sub-pixel shifts, multiple images of the galaxy will suffice. Ideally throw in an image of a black cloth over the lens too to really highlight the sensor noise profile.
The difference between large and small sensors all but disappeared a few generations back.
Oh look. The full frame sensor has discernably less noise than the APS-C sensor, despite both being 24MP. The 20MP four-thirds sensor is even worse, and the 20MP one inch sensor is fucking terrible in comparison.
Those are all 2018 cameras.
To be clear bigger still is better, but that is purely hardware and first principles and ignores a whole lot of signal processing advancements that have been made.
Which is my entire fucking point. At any sensor generation, the larger sensor captures light much better.
Shit, go back four years - multiple sensor generations - and check the APS-C sensor noise levels compared to the same megapixel smaller sensors now: https://www.dpreview.com/revie...
Oh look. The one inch sensor still has relatively poor noise. So it's taken 4 years for sensor quality to jump one size in quality.
Meanwhile, since this conversation is based around mobile phone sensors I added one to that last comparison. Despite being three stops slower than the other sensors its noise profile kind of proves my point pretty emphatically.
My six year old camera with a four-thirds sensor still takes lovely photographs. My year old camera still sucks at low-light photography compared to a new full frame DSLR.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe I'm old, crotchety and cynical too, and also aware just how big a pain in the arse achieving more than one-off anonymity would be.
But shit, one-off? Fucking hell, just catch a train into London. They'll know it's one of the 11 million people in the city that week, so I guess it's not truly anonymous, but it's close enough.
When fires are set to intentionally cause people to flee from their homes (allowing the arsonist to loot them) they're going to spread.
Sure, you can model that spread too. But even there, when the model will apply to the known environment, which is wrong: there were illegal buildings of which the authorities were unaware, could thus not have included in the model, and that would thus have led to unmodelled outcomes.
In short, the Greeks were fucked anyway and I'm suspicious of the motives of the person claiming otherwise.
You... you... actually think that you're anonymous on the web nowadays?
If I want or need to be? Fuck yes.
Buy second hand device, war drive to find open hotspot, instant anonymity and I haven't even bounced via VPNs, TOR, Amazon AWS or the Chans yet.
Nah. Maybe if you look young and innocent. I don't get asked for ID when I buy alcohol and you can buy cigarettes from vending machines.
I think I did get asked for ID once. Ever. But I didn't start buying alcohol until I was 16.
a batshit insane statement
A pseudonym is an identity.
If you leak NSA secrets using a pseudonym we still don't know who you are and the Government can't (necessarily) find and hurt you. We can however ascertain the likelihood of your leaks being accurate based on your history of leaking.
Some people on Slashdot disregard everything I say, because they're aware of my identity here and dislike things I've said in the past. That's a form of repercussion; my behaviour has lessened my influence with them. That doesn't mean that they know who am I, where I live, who I work for, what I stuck my cock into last night.
Should I have had to put myself and family at risk of that when I captured a video of a serious rights violation by an officer?
No, but it would be lovely if you could share that video using some form of identity that lets lawyers, journalists and others contact and engage with you to verify its validity and provide support in pursuit of justice.
It's ok, I don't mind you looking like an idiot.
https://www.collinsdictionary....
https://en.oxforddictionaries....
https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki...
https://dictionary.cambridge.o...
https://www.thefreedictionary....
Me, I speak English.
To be fair, his spelling was as close to faeces as yours.
Both shit.
a hypothetical climate they've already destroyed
Destroyed? I'm enjoying the best summer I can remember. Weeks of beautiful warm sunshine and it's not even August yet.
Better yet, we're promised lots of snow when winter arrives.
This climate change thing is going to make my retirement a joy!
Who is forcing you to pay? Windows 10 is free.
Not legally, no.
Cool. A desktop computer with a few "phone" processes that you can't get rid of, just like I can't get rid of them on my tablet. And a "location manager" that runs 24/7.
Ah, I see you've used the Microsoft Surface hardware too!
Who the fuck said I had a job at the time?
Shit, the UK didn't have a minimum wage in the 80s and in the 90s I was working for less than $3.10/hour.
But hey, keep judging people by your own income level. Doesn't change the very substantial shift downwards in the cost of photography in the last 40 years.
Black people reflect less light, and detail is less-obvious.
I have noticed that I find it a lot harder to photograph people with dark skin. Facial features don't easily stand out from shadows and there's far less skin texture visible.
In controlled conditions it's a non-issue but for candid photography it's a big problem :(
they realize that being openly racist turns a lot of people off so they moderate their language and use dog whistles
This might have some semblance of credibility if every single cry of 'dog whistle' wasn't either a chan related wind up or demonstrating the blatant bigotry of the person making the claim.
Twitter is merely perpetuates and accentuates the bigotry through its horrifically biased review mechanisms.
Seriously? Photography was cheaper'n shit in the 80s.
When a single photograph cost me more than a day's income (which was the case in the 80s) it sure as fuck wasn't cheaper'n shit.
I certaiinly didn't carry a camera in my pocket that could take thousands of photographs for a marginal cost of 20 minutes charging its battery.
As others have said, it's just point and shoot.
They were talking utter bollocks too.
But hey, don't let that stop you feeling superior the thousands of professional photographers making their living shooting with mirrorless cameras.
Shit, you'll be telling me next that Leica full frame mirrorless cameras are just point & shoot. Go for it, we could all use the laugh.
Leica sell a mirrorless camera that lets you focus using an optical viewfinder.
Most of the other manufacturers let you use focus peaking. I find that far easier to use than a DSLR to really pick my focus point and its superiority increases as I get older and my eyesight starts to go.
Then there's the digital zoom that lets you pick just a segment of the image to fill the viewfinder/LCD and assess the zoom.
But hey, I'll acknowledge that I take a lot of out of focus photographs. That's mainly because I take a lot of photographs and/or forget I've left the camera in manual focus. It's rare that I fail to get an in-focus photograph of a subject at all - and when I do, it's usually fast moving wildlife that isn't going to piss around waiting for me to manually focus anyway.
In short, mirrorless manual focussing is every bit as good as SLR for me, if not better.
Yeah, I know what you mean. My mirrorless camera dropped to 63% battery remaining after just 600 photographs last week.
Maybe if I'd switched the LCD screen off and used the viewfinder I could've got more? Or maybe if I want to take more than 2500 photographs in a day I should invest in the battery grip, rather than just carrying around a second battery as I do now.
As for the heat, well, it's a good job I change lenses occasionally and let the heat out. Shooting in 36C heat in Malta was clearly impacting the camera's operator.
If he's breaking SEC rules then tell the SEC.
A billionaire ringing up his boss though? That's just bullying. That proves that Musk is a cunt.
Less ideal in an open top car though.
However, my 1 series with a solid roof did fuck up completely in icy conditions: the window would open a little, then refuse to close because of the ice.
Far more useful was the 'hit the unlock button twice and the windows will open halfway when you open the door' feature. That made getting in and out of the car much easier in tight parking spaces.
Was that guy a subject expert
Yes.
or just another white guy on a sex trip in Thailand?
What the fuck does his race have to do with anything?
Why would being on a 'sex trip' have anything to do with paedophilia? Wait? You think sex trips in Thailand are for paedophiles? That tells us much more about you than Thailand.
Most people in the UK would associate Thailand with ladyboys, the fucking of whom is perfectly legal in the UK and in Thailand. Not to mention a fine cabaret act: https://www.ladyboysofbangkok....
Elon Musk just sent something in part in response to prompting by people on Twitter.
No, he also engaged heavily with the media to promote himself and his business interests, exploiting vulnerable children for his own benefit.
He then defamed an individual in a way that's caused lasting damage to that person's reputation. For evidence, read your own fucking post.
It's a tricky situation for a manufacturer. They need to include enough room in the wholesale price for retailers to make a profit, but that then opens space for other retailers to treat a product as a loss-leader (or otherwise accept low margins), which distorts the online market for that product.
Consumers can find and will buy at the lowest price (ish, subject to laziness, trust in the retailer, shipping costs and other factors) so if something is available everywhere within a 10% spread and someone else has it 30% cheaper, the other retailers wont get the sales.
The manufacturer has limited options available within the law, and why I always check a manufacturer's own online shop when buying electronics. Several of them effectively price match the cheapest online retailer and/or throw in additional incentives.
Apple have previous:
https://www.theguardian.com/bo...
On hardware too:
https://www.wired.co.uk/articl...
That non-compete agreement? Not enforcable.
Entirely irrelevant. If both companies gain by complying with the agreement they've made, they will continue to comply, even if (and usually causing) consumers lose out.
What you're failing miserably to comprehend is that all the signal processing, image processing, manipulation of the data captured from the sensor is entirely fucking irrelevant.
You can do all of it the same way on data captured from any sensor. It's a constant.
The variable becomes the pixel size of the sensor, and my point is that the larger this is, the more light it can capture, and the better quality image you will get as a result.
Try to understand what I'm talking about
I understand quite well enough. You're a megapixel count queen and think software and/or multiple exposures can compensate for shitty sensor size. I've demonstrated pretty comprehensively that it can not.
The benefit of the galaxies is they don't move
That's wrong on pretty much every level.
allowing us to reset the nose floor between identical exposures
I like my photographs to work from a single exposure. A bird wont take a fish from water multiple times in a row to allow you to capture multiple identical exposures and eliminate the noise as the difference between them.
Just doing a longer exposure doesn't help you much determine what is Galaxy and what is a photon hitting the sensor.
The photons come from the fucking galaxy. A longer exposure does indeed allow you to receive more light from the galaxy, or star, or reflection of light off a sea eagle in its dive.
Of course, that sea eagle is moving quite quickly, which is why bigger pixels allowing more of that reflected light to be captured in a shorter timespan are so fucking useful.
NASA specifically created a technique for eliminating sensor noise by making sub-pixel shifts in the camera
My camera can use sub-pixel shifts in the sensor too but that's still fuck all use with moving subjects, or when you don't want to sit there waiting.
I use the same technique when I image galaxies to great effect
You don't even need to use sub-pixel shifts, multiple images of the galaxy will suffice. Ideally throw in an image of a black cloth over the lens too to really highlight the sensor noise profile.
The difference between large and small sensors all but disappeared a few generations back.
Did it fuck. Check https://www.dpreview.com/revie...
Oh look. The full frame sensor has discernably less noise than the APS-C sensor, despite both being 24MP. The 20MP four-thirds sensor is even worse, and the 20MP one inch sensor is fucking terrible in comparison.
Those are all 2018 cameras.
To be clear bigger still is better, but that is purely hardware and first principles and ignores a whole lot of signal processing advancements that have been made.
Which is my entire fucking point. At any sensor generation, the larger sensor captures light much better.
Shit, go back four years - multiple sensor generations - and check the APS-C sensor noise levels compared to the same megapixel smaller sensors now:
https://www.dpreview.com/revie...
Oh look. The one inch sensor still has relatively poor noise. So it's taken 4 years for sensor quality to jump one size in quality.
Meanwhile, since this conversation is based around mobile phone sensors I added one to that last comparison. Despite being three stops slower than the other sensors its noise profile kind of proves my point pretty emphatically.
My six year old camera with a four-thirds sensor still takes lovely photographs. My year old camera still sucks at low-light photography compared to a new full frame DSLR.
Sensor pixel size matters.