jpg deliberately degraded

Steve Koterski wrote:
That is a correct. It is a result of the War on Terror.

Shortly after the attack on the WTC on Septrember 11, 2001, the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identified JPG and JPEG images
as a resource of great national strategic value. As such, they require
regulation by and oversight of the US Government.

Regulations were composed and implemented to enable this oversight.
All devices capable of recording images (such as digital cameras) are
required to automatically transmit the images to the Library of
Strategic Images (LSI), which is overseen by the National Security
Agency (NSA). Previously manufactured devices were retroactively
modified through remote means to comply with these regulations. After
arriving at the LSI, the images are transmitted back to the user's
device (these being the copies of the images you see).

Similarly, computer software that creates JPG images transmit the
images to the LSI via the Internet. After being transmitted to the LSI
and cataloged, they are transmitted back to the sending machine
(identified by the UUID of the host system).

The LSI maintains copies of every JPG image ever created—past,
present, and future. The LSI has an enormous staff that is tasked with
reviewing and evaluating each new JPG picture taken, anywhere in the
world. In addition to the visual content, other data is maintain for
each image, including: author/photographer, make and model of camera,
date and time the image was taken, exposure readings, and white
balance settings.

There have been rumors of some of these JPG images being degraded.
Subsequent research and information gained through the Freedom of
Information Act (FoIA) have revealed that this occurs only with people
currently under investigation for connections with terror
organizations, organized crime, and gross nutrition offenses.
Apparently, when someone is under investigation, the images are
diverted to any additional (top secret) location between the device
and the LSI. This extra diversion results in the degragation where the
person taking the picture does not get 100% of the picture. Typically,
though, only 10% of the picture is lost in this process (known as the
Brown-Curley CYMK 300 Bifurcation Process).

The US Government does make available forms with which you can request
return of the lost 10% of the images. These forms are also available
via the Internet....
.... as JPG files?

--

Len

Thanks! Someone who recognized my post for what it was.

Betcha that if you let that article out into the wild of the rest of
usenet, and especially if you added some sort of "tax on .jpg images"
bit to it (similar to the old "modem tax" urban legend), you'd have a
great run with it. :^)

Oooh. A tax on JPGs. That's a good one. evil grin

There actually is a tax on JPG images. It was implemented by Congress
shortly after the Mayaguez Incident in 1973...

BTW, I did double-check the headers on the OP before replying with my
satire, just to make sure it would not be cross-posted to some
conspiracy theory newsgroups.

That was amazing. About all the creativity I can come up with for someone
like that is to refer to him as a dumb ass. Thanks for the laugh.
Rob

wrote in message
oups.com...
Greet to group,
I have just heard that jpg is made degraded by US government.
Deliberate! You do not get 100% of photograph. This is like the
selective availability of GPS by America Government. This is big shock
to me. From now I will use png and say no to Mr Bush playing with my
picture
Laszlo

Don your tinfoil hat and go squat under a power line.

"Steve Koterski" wrote in message
...
snip
The LSI maintains copies of every JPG image ever created-past,
present, and future. The LSI has an enormous staff that is tasked with
reviewing and evaluating each new JPG picture taken, anywhere in the
world. In addition to the visual content, other data is maintain for
each image, including: author/photographer, make and model of camera,
date and time the image was taken, exposure readings, and white
balance settings.

But they've been distracted by the incoming JPEGs from Hustler, Playboy,
Playgirl (depending on sexual orientation) and Maxim, and were never heard
from again...
--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm

wrote:
Greet to group,
I have just heard that jpg is made degraded by US government.
Deliberate! You do not get 100% of photograph. This is like the
selective availability of GPS by America Government. This is big shock
to me. From now I will use png and say no to Mr Bush playing with my
picture
Laszlo


I just read that the U.S. Government and the Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) do not classify Dihydrogen Monoxide as a toxic or carcinogenic
substance (as it does with better known chemicals such as hydrochloric
acid and benzene), DHMO is a constituent of many known toxic substances,
diseases and disease-causing agents, environmental hazards and can even
be lethal to humans in quantities as small as a thimbleful.

Ban DHMO !!
http://www.dhmo.org/

--

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:07:50 -0600, R Pradeep Chandran
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:41:44 GMT, Daniel Silevitch
wrote:
to the extreme, about one step removed from claiming that the
government
faked the mmon landings with the help of alien technology stored at
Area
51.

You are wrong. The world scientific community agrees that we have not
yet developed technology for even observing much less landing on mmon.
According to Dr. Capensis Delphinus, one of the most intelligent
beings on the earth, the technology required for observing mmon
properly will not be developed for another 42 years. Thus NASA's
claims of landing on mmon are completely false. These claims were made
by some NASA scientist after having too many Pan Galactic Gargle
Blasters.

Hope this has cleared the matter.

I don't think that there's any question that the government faked any
mmon landings. But how about the moon?

Actually, one of the better commercials I have seen was the one
where they were saying that we went to the moon, discovered it
was NOT made of cheese and have not been back since. Behold
the power of cheese !!

mikey

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:36:00 -0800, "Skip"
wrote:

The LSI maintains copies of every JPG image ever created-past,
present, and future. The LSI has an enormous staff that is tasked with
reviewing and evaluating each new JPG picture taken, anywhere in the
world. In addition to the visual content, other data is maintain for
each image, including: author/photographer, make and model of camera,
date and time the image was taken, exposure readings, and white
balance settings.

But they've been distracted by the incoming JPEGs from Hustler, Playboy,
Playgirl (depending on sexual orientation) and Maxim, and were never heard
from again...

So it IS a terrorist plot to destroy America!

So I was right?!!??!!

On Jan 29, 9:59 pm, John Bean wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:31:02 -0700, ray
wrote:
[snip]
B.S. jpg is made degraded because it is a lossy format. There is supposed
to be a lossless form, but no one ever implemented it.

Lossless JPEG compression is used on raw data in the DNG
format.

Canon CR2 as well. (dcraw uses the same code to decompress DNG & CR2).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/photography/

I think my frend Miklos is how you say "pull the leg". I tell him it
is a lie and now he say not US Govermnet but Microsoft that degrade
jpg. He tell me if you compress 90% Microdaft take other 10% and keep
them in secret database. So they have 10% of every picture ever taken.
Ha, good joke Miklos.

Laszlo Plook

On Jan 29, 4:35 pm, wrote:
Greet to group,
I have just heard that jpg is made degraded by US government.
Deliberate! You do not get 100% of photograph. This is like the
selective availability of GPS by America Government. This is big shock
to me. From now I will use png and say no to Mr Bush playing with my
picture
Laszlo

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:56:35 -0500, J Clarke wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:07:50 -0600, R Pradeep Chandran
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:41:44 GMT, Daniel Silevitch
wrote:
to the extreme, about one step removed from claiming that the government
faked the mmon landings with the help of alien technology stored at Area
51.

You are wrong. The world scientific community agrees that we have not
yet developed technology for even observing much less landing on mmon.
According to Dr. Capensis Delphinus, one of the most intelligent
beings on the earth, the technology required for observing mmon
properly will not be developed for another 42 years. Thus NASA's
claims of landing on mmon are completely false. These claims were made
by some NASA scientist after having too many Pan Galactic Gargle
Blasters.

Hope this has cleared the matter.

I don't think that there's any question that the government faked any
mmon landings. But how about the moon?

Of course not. Where would they have gotten the quantity of cheese
necessary?

-dms