4 ms·
Is this really a prevalent feature these days? I must be completely out of the loop. That must be the most useless "feature" I've ever heard of. What possible
by slavak 16y ago
Is this really a prevalent feature these days? I must be completely out of the loop.
That must be the most useless "feature" I've ever heard of. What possible reason is there for doing this?!
- aw3c2 16y agoI would guess some politicians asked for way to stop people counterfeiting money with image manipulation tools or scanners. This solution satisfied them and made them feel good.
- Zak 16y agoI understand why this might make an uneducated politician happy. What I don't understand is the incentive for Adobe to do it. Was there ever a danger of restrictions on image editing software?
- A1kmm 16y agoJust a guess: maybe they have a contract to supply software to one or more governments, and either a term is that they have to do it, or they don't want to upset the government and lose the contract.
- tzs 16y ago> What possible reason is there for doing this?! You might try reading the first sentence of the article.
- A1kmm 16y agoHas it been edited? In the version at the time of writing this comment, it says that they 'will not process the images', but it doesn't say why not.
- TeMPOraL 16y agoMaybe it works as a cost-effective way to eliminate occasional counterfitter-wannabes. Reminds me of: http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/