SchmidtGenetics

You realize a meme is an image or anything else that’s shared right…? The second you post any image here, it automatically becomes a meme whether you intended or not.

A couple of satellites can make a larger telescope than we could ever build on earth, and you avoid the natural interference as well as the the interference from other satellites (star link isn’t the only source of interference…).

Huh, the same is done in space, you realize that… yeah?

My comment isn’t disjointed and it’s extremely easy to comprehend, put this shit in space like they always should have been doing and avoid the natural interference, as well as the other interference from the thousands of other satellites, starlink isn’t the only issue and it’s not fixed by getting rid of them…

And? What’s that got to do with radio interfernce?

You can do the same in space…

Any satellite would provide interference, and the earth naturally has its own, so that’s a non-factor, when the best results can only be had in space.

Radio astronomy isn’t exactly a home hobbies thing if you didn’t know….

It’s funny, I would be right there with you just having some fun with my truck/car, but yeah if it was visible like this it’s a totally different issue.

I know they can already use that data to deny warranty if I’m hooning it that like that, so yeah haha

If they are using single point data I guess yeah, but they would most likely use a rolling average. Average speed over 5 seconds could account for the glitch, or only continuously updated data to avoid those rubber bands.

I mean maybe this is the push they need to actually spend the cash and get one up in space that is away from natural interferences as well?

Sucks for the home radio Astro guy, but they have the solution, have had for a long time.

No, but it seems like you’re assuming they would look at this sandboxed by itself…? Of course there is more than one data point to look at, when you uploaded the image would noted, so even if you uploaded an image with older exif data, so what? The original poster would still have the original image, and the original image would have scraped and documented when it was hosted. So you host the image with fake data later, and it compares the two and sees that your fake one was posted 6 months later, it gets flagged like it should. And the original owner can claim authenticity.

Metadata provides a trail and can be used with other data points to show authenticity when a bad actor appears for your image.

You are apparently assuming to be looking at a single images exif data to determine what? Obviously they would use every image that looks similar or matches identical and use exif data to find the real one. As well as other mentioned methods.

The only vector point is newly created images that haven’t been digitally signed, anything digitally signed can be verified as new, unless you go to extreme lengths to fake and image and than somehow recapture it with a digitally signed camera without it being detected fake by other methods….