• kernelle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    2 months ago

    Let me be clear so you don’t misunderstand me. When it comes down to prove an image is genuine you haven’t been able to say “look at this picture, it’s real for sure” for almost 30 years. When you want to use a picture to prove something you have to provide much more details about where/how/when/why it was taken, access to those tools won’t change the fact a picture in a vacuum has no meaning.

    Like I said, old-man-yelling-at-cloud energy.

    • ggppjj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I am no longer interested in continuing a conversation with you, as you’ve convinced me that you’re not interested in engaging with what I am saying. Thank you for your time and perspective to this point.

    • chirping@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      As an “outside observer”, I think maybe you’re not seeing (what I believe is) the other guys viewpoint: What you are bringing up (photoshop has been possible already) is a core part of what he said from the start, and his point builds on top of that. So obviously he already knows it, and arguing about it disregards that his line of argumentation builds upon the basis we all agreed upon to be true until you brought it up as … contrarian? To his point. doesn’t seem like “old man yells at cloud” energy, more like “Uhm, achtually”