I've heard that one can't copy currency on a scanner. So, I thought
to try.
I put a $1 bill on my Epson 2400 scanner and scanned it using Epson
Scan software, in automatic mode. The scanner quit. I repeated it
two more times and each time the scanner simply quit. However, it
did put three pdf files on my desk top. When I tried to open them
with Acrobat Reader, I got an error message: (minus) -10660. So, I
looked up Mac error codes with Google and found nothing. There are
no -10000 error codes listed. And, all the other pdf files on my
desktop returned the same error message. Finally, I deleted and
trashed the three pdf scans of the $1 bill, and the other pdf files
magically opened the images as usual. This scanner is about three
years old. This tells me that there is something in the scanner and the
Acrobat software that takes an action when either thinks one is
trying to use their software illegally.
I seem to recall trying the same thing through photoshop (or
photoshop elements) a few years ago. Then I received an error
message to the effect that you can't image currency. But, my memory
may not be perfect. This time I got no warning, except for the
-10660 error message.
So, it seems to me that the government effort to prevent
counterfeiting of currency may be more extensive than is being
discussed in these pages.
Roger
Roger Eichhorn
eichhorn@xxxxxx
On 19 Oct 2005, at 21:23, karl shah-jenner wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dyer-Bennet" <
: As to "so freaking what", most of the time it's pretty
irrelevant; but
: if I want to write an anonymous whistle-blower letter to my
senator or
: the GAO or somebody about malfeasance in the government department I
: work in, it suddenly becomes pretty darned important!
:
: And given the abuses the government routinely commits with the
police
: powers it has now, I'm very much opposed to giving them more.
: --
precisely - a print or a photocopy can reveal the origin of the
item, and
these days of manufacturing 'events' to justify actions, any paper
trail
could be used against someone.
here's a nice one for you - you make a print of a kid playing down the
beach for some parent and it turns up in some paedophiles collection -
guess what? At least under new laws here in Oz, you'd be guilty of
child
sex offences!
Bye-bye computer, printer, cameras. And you don't get them back
even if
you're found not guilty - and you'll have to rights to own such things
stripped from you.
Took a pic of a plane? A copy of a torn up print is found in the
garbage..
the plane went down months later under suspicious circumstances -
'Gentlemen, we have a suspect!'
A photograph reveals it's self to have been printed by you, the
building in
the shot has been the subject of numerous bomb threats.. black
choppers are
on the way ;-)
maybe if we ignore it, it won't happen.
No seriously, the governments of the world are once again scared of
their
citizenry and that's NEVER been a good thing. Laws are changing daily
curtailing liberties and the most tenuous evidence is being strung
together
to build cases.. then laws being passed retrospectively to protect the
faults in the laws or to justify flawed decisions. It is of
concern to me
and maybe others.
A nice example occurred here some time back - all measuring devices
in Oz
are required to be calibrated and signed off by a government
department
referred to as Weights and Measures. An individual who worked for
this
department contested a speed camera ticket and queried when the
camera had
last been checked. It hadn't - it had never been checked, and
under the
law of the day the device could NOT be considered lawfully
accurate. A few
weeks down the track we have a new law (retrospective of course)
saying
that speed cameras are the ONE ITEM in Oz that measures something
that does
not need to be calibrated. Nice.
At least now those who criticise KNOW that your printer may be
embedding
info in the print, if they'd rather, I could shut up next time I find
something like this and they can find it out themselves.
I still think it'd be a handy thing for photog's to be able to
validate
their prints with embedded data. I had in the past toyed with
various dyes
and the like trying to come up with something that revealed copyright
infringement - something that would identify a scan or copy if not
preventing such things. Photographers used to want such a method
of IDing
or protecting their prints.. not the case anymore?
Oh well.
There's a new law being proposed here in Oz at the moment, police
are to
have the power to 'shoot to kill' any *suspected* terrorist who
may be
running from them. We are not an armed country like the US, and
police
shooting are rare, but this will mean the law will grant police the
right
to kill people who are merely suspected of something - effectively
they
would be lawful government executioners!
it really does worry me.
k
