4 ms·

Loll, you have a lot of faith in the legal system that I do not. Expert witnesses are commonly full of shit.

• giancarlostoro 3mo ago
  I heard one argue that "zooming" on an image by adding pixels with an algorithm is normal, and he's had such "evidence" used in court before. I was a little horrified as someone who has worked on digital forensic software at a former employer. Adding pixels to an image is not evidence, you're fabricating something out of thin air, especially if its drastically smaller, its even more likely to be BS.
  • jbxntuehineoh 3mo ago
    but... how _else_ would you Enhance the image?
  • dataflow 3mo ago
    Are you saying any photos I take with phone that had digital zoom is automatically I admissible? Or if not, isn't that consistent with what they said?
• monster_truck 3mo ago
  I didn't say all expert witnesses are good nor did I claim they are all used in good faith. Merely that, unlike in the invented scenario above, statistical differences in the random garbage that gets written to a disk across different tool or OS versions has been successfully used to place a time window on when exactly someone destroyed evidence.
• marysol5 3mo ago
  You know that defence can bring in an expert witness too right?