https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo1BR9itwOY

https://blackhat.com/presentations/bh-usa-05/bh-us-05-long.p...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_Security

I suppose you could describe having the modesty to admit to yourself when you don't understand and research something deeper could be described as a soft skill, but I'd say it's a stretch. You are dealing with yourself in that scenario, not others.

Neither are skills that a large portion of users of those services pursue to any meaningful extent, I'll grant you that. They also certainly are not synonymous with the term "soft skills" as I know it. So I think I am on your side of the fence on that part any way.

It's wild seeing someone fully interact with a reality that isn't there and then come back not knowing anything about what happened. I had a friend in the early 2000's that had us video tape and babysit him. He had a half hour long conversation with his dead mother on a telephone that wasn't there. Also, he chain smoked non existent cigarettes for hours. He knew we were there and interacted with us, but he had no continuity.

Let's see if you can even explain what I am telling you.

What would be the first step to resolve this issue in the system I am proposing?

Next one please.

Besides, after a famous journalist dies, their work is already famous, people already know it or don't. This is a contrived and irrelevant example.

Again, this is not hypothetical, we already know how this works. Next one please.

Let's also list the points you have conceded by quietly giving them up:

1. Hacking the camera is irrelevant.

2. Images can be verified.

Do you want to actually engage with the conversation? The funny thing is that there are engineering challenges in this space, but you don't seem to understand the basics well enough to even get to that point.

If your argument is that images can't be verified, you are going to need to provide some kind of backing to that. We know well that there are watermarks and tell tale signs to go off. Regardless, if they are depicting real world events, outside confirmation can be used.

You also don't seem to understand the point of the signature. It's not to prevent fake images, it's to tie an identity to images so that that trust can be established and permanently lost in the case of a malicious actor. Your arguments repeatedly have failed to engage with the actual system proposed.

Besides wasn't your argument "hacking" a minute ago? So you concede that then? You seem to have moved on.

We should be able to move certificates on and off it because they would most likely expire anyway. So, you can get the keys from the camera, what then? You use openssl to sign an image that shouldn't be signed... what then? You do this enough and get caught, you lose your cert and can never pass the kyc to get another one.

Then every picture you used it for in the past would start showing a big red exclamation point with a note, "This is a scumbag user known for forging images".

The idea is that a centralized source of trust would revoke certificates belonging to bad actors or those that were stolen.

The average American will keep shouting over and over again that "China can't innovate" while they quietly and slowly tick off every box on their checklist of issues. It doesn't end well for us.

> which are like you said handled

Also, I corrected your misstatement about payments. They have absolutely nothing to do with decomp, and certainly can't be used to dismiss the entire attack surface of a mobile banking app. Your example is complete nonsense.

You are really digging a hole here.