4 ms·

There will be no CTRL + Z, as it can only be used to save to a new document (just like scanning). Under the hood, you created a new document, rasterize the ori

There will be no CTRL + Z, as it can only be used to save to a new document (just like scanning). Under the hood, you created a new document, rasterize the original document page by page as JPEG, and insert the JPEGs back to the new document. You can even create a fake "printer", that outputs a PDF with rasterized images as pages, so you don't have to teach the office clerks to anything extra. To me, it seems to be indistinguishable from printing and scanning. PS: It's pretty easy to verify if the page contains nothing but an image, programmically, especially if you also wrote the software that rasterize it in the first place.

jooize 6y ago
It is probably still easier to screw up on a computer than by looking at physical documents to verify them and then scanning them.
pessimizer 6y ago
> It's pretty easy to verify if the page contains nothing but an image, programmically, especially if you also wrote the software that rasterize it in the first place. It's pretty easy for a computer to verify any of this, the point is making it idiot proof. You don't have to be much of an idiot, if you process hundreds of documents a year where there's no way to visually verify the difference between a badly redacted document and a well redacted document, to screw up once. Especially when the difference between them is that you remembered to push the "redact correctly button", and if you forgot that, remembered to push the "verify if is redacted correctly programmatically" button before hitting send. What you do is create a ritual where you have to walk across the room and use a physical machine. You'll remember doing that. And if you don't, since the output will look a bit crap, you can confirm it trivially. Creating a process that has to be done perfectly every time or it fails catastrophically, and has few indications of failure during the process, is worse than having no process at all.

jooize 6y ago

It is probably still easier to screw up on a computer than by looking at physical documents to verify them and then scanning them.

pessimizer 6y ago

> It's pretty easy to verify if the page contains nothing but an image, programmically, especially if you also wrote the software that rasterize it in the first place. It's pretty easy for a computer to verify any of this, the point is making it idiot proof. You don't have to be much of an idiot, if you process hundreds of documents a year where there's no way to visually verify the difference between a badly redacted document and a well redacted document, to screw up once. Especially when the difference between them is that you remembered to push the "redact correctly button", and if you forgot that, remembered to push the "verify if is redacted correctly programmatically" button before hitting send. What you do is create a ritual where you have to walk across the room and use a physical machine. You'll remember doing that. And if you don't, since the output will look a bit crap, you can confirm it trivially. Creating a process that has to be done perfectly every time or it fails catastrophically, and has few indications of failure during the process, is worse than having no process at all.