I was thinking about those outfits celebrities wear that mess with flash photography equipment, and I was watching a dude on TV just now whose shirt pattern was going apeshit because of the camera, and I wondered if there could ever be a pattern or material that, when filmed, caused the camera irreversible damage. And if that were physically possible, I wondered if intentionally showing up to camera-heavy events wearing said shirt would constitute a crime on my part.
It’s just a shirt after all. It’s not like I’m grabbing a camera and smashing it on the ground. But at the same time, I know it will have that effect, so I’m accountable. But it’s not like my shirt is emitting damaging laser beams or anything, it’s entirely passive.
Also, is there anything like this scenario in real life/law?
if you invent some passive way to damage tech by just being in its vicinity. not only would it be illegal. it would be a super weapon.
A weapon to surpass metal gear?
Snake?!
Snaaaaaake!!!
A weapon to defeat metal gear
How better to surpass something than to defeat it?
Instructions unclear: Ran a marathon, got disqualified for defeating the other runners instead of running past them.
How they gonna find out? No cameras to witness it
eyes
Eyes aren’t electric…… unless your a bird
you dont neds electric eyes to witness something. i witness stuff all the time and my eyes are analogue.
But if our eyes aren’t eyes, are our eyes eye eyes?
bro’s got the level 9 EMP aura
What you describe is simply not possible with a passive material. Funnily your example of something shooting lasers is probably the only thing that could come close to actual damage
The most you can do is one of those adversarial patterns that just confuses the white balance and autofocus. There is nothing you can do to affect someone shooting in manual mode
If you could damage a camera by pointing it at something, the manufacturer would fix the issue before selling it, because no one is buying a camera that does.
I am thinking if you could wear a mirror that would direct all the sunlight right at the camera. That would have to be an active tracking system, but wouldn’t emit any light itself.
It would have to be parabolic and yeah as you suggest you would either need a big robotic rig to aim it or you would have to be very very obvious with your intent to damage given there’s pretty much only one specific place a given parabolic mirror can be to damage something else.
Parabolic would only work if the camera is in the focal point, so you’d need a different part of the parabola or a different parabola depending on where you are standing relative to the camera. This is in addition to the aiming mechanism.
And even then, I’m not convinced it will damage all camera techs instead of just overexposing the image or frame for some. If they just clamp the affected pixels instead of trying to maintain the relative brightness, they might be able to still see your face clearly.
Might not cause damage but there is the Camera Shy Hoodie: https://www.macpierce.com/the-camera-shy-hoodie
Instructions for how to DIY provided, so it doesn’t have to be a hoodie.
Although that really only works as long as the camera doesn’t have an IR filter in place.
If the camera has an IR filter, how would IR be able to make night viewing possible?
It works in the opposite. With the IR filter you get a nice colorful image in daytime, but not the IR lights at night
happy cake day
Thanks :)
My dude is trying to create a shirt that just continuously recharges and fires EMPs lol
I think it depends on whether it’s active or passive. Active - e.g. a laser that damages a camera sensor, then yes, your device is actively damaging someone else’s camera - deliberate property damage. Passive - e.g. reflective strips so the exposure is bad, a pattern that is hard to focus on or similar- that’s fine - camera owner is making a decision to expose their gear to the environment. Even if, say, it’s a changing pattern that deceives the autofocus into working constantly (no, I don’t know exactly how that would work, but it’s the best I can think of at short notice) so it wears out faster.
Creating something that damages nearby electronics? Yeah, that’s probably not going to fly. It really doesn’t matter if it only damages things that actively film/photograph you. Like, it’d be illegal if I walked up and hammered every camera that photographed me too.
It’d also be illegal to point a laser light into a camera to damage the sensor
Looking to get an eicar QR code shirt?
That’s incredible!
No
A similar thing that might be possible is to create a shirt that shows something that exploits a vulnerability in software. Some hardware can be bricked by software (this used to be the case for MacBook batteries).
Invent?!? Bro, just use infrared LEDs 😂
This reminds me of a movie or a tv show where people were sneaking into a compound and disabled the security cameras with a laser pointer.
Damaging a camera is very different from something that makes taking a picture impossible. It doesn’t matter if it is passive or active, only the end result is important.
A celebrity might get away with it when just trying to get home but would probably be required to pay for damage to the camera. Anyone at a large venue is going to be ruining everyone’s cameras and that would be a huge deal.
I just recently read a short story with a similar concept, all pictures and videos have been banned since there was found to be images that will kill anyone when they look at them.
When I get back to my anthology book I’ll look up what one it was, it’s in the Big Book of CyberPunk.
There are things that damage a camera when you point at them, but they aren’t passive. Things like x-ray sources could do that. Also the sun.
So no, even if you reflected 100% of the light from the flash back into the lens, there’s just not enough of it to do any damage.
If you were somehow able to focus all of it on one single pixel on the sensor, you might be able to damage that pixel, but that would require a large piece of optical equipment basically on top of the camera.
Removed by mod
