Photoshop Fails At Counterfeit Prevention 712
JediDan writes "Wired reports that the 'Anti-counterfeiting provisions in the latest version of Adobe Systems' flagship product have proven little more than a speed bump, but company representatives insist that including them was the right thing to do.' Kevin Connor, Adobe's director of product management for professional digital imaging said, 'As a market leader and a good corporate citizen, this just seems like the right thing to do.' Maybe if they didn't spend R&D time and money on useless features, their products would be more affordable."
Economics (Score:3, Informative)
Please, stop making comments on what they should price their software until you take some rudimentary economics courses.
R&D time and money? (Score:5, Informative)
See old /. comment for how it works (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Dupe? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Considered they might have been pushed? (Score:5, Informative)
"The anti-counterfeit software in Photoshop CS was developed by the Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group, an organization established by the governors of the G-10 central banks to promote the use of anti-counterfeit devices in the computer industry....The inner workings of the counterfeit deterrence system are so secret that not even Adobe is privy to them. The Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group provides the software as a black box without revealing its precise inner workings, Connor said."
Re:not like we haven't seen this before (Score:2, Informative)
M.
'Feature' already trespassed! (Score:5, Informative)
The price doesn't reflect cost (Score:3, Informative)
Anyone who believes this must also believe that Microsoft is trying hard to lower costs but just can't do it. Face it, this software reflects what they think the market will bear, not what it costs to develop. A few years ago when Photoshop 5.x was out, they also had a "Lite" version that cost about half as much as full Photoshop. Thing was, you could also get the exact same licensed software free with a $100 Maxtor hard drive. Anyone who paid the full price for the "Lite" version was a real chump, but I'm sure there were plenty who did, and thought they were saving money after seeing the cost of the "Full" version.
Also, several years ago I had a friend who bought a scanner that came with a bundeled and fully licensed copy of the full version of Photoshop (NOT the "Lite" version). At the time scanners were expensive, but he still paid about half of what it would have cost to buy just Photoshop for a good scanner and a Full, legal, upgradeable Photoshop. (he got the Kai with it too!)
They could spend 1/10 of what they now spend on R&D, but they are not going to drop the product price by a penny while they think they can still get current prices. On the other hand, if you shop around you can sometimes get it at a much fairer price.
I suppose reading the article is too much. (Score:5, Informative)
From the article:
The anti-counterfeit software in Photoshop CS was developed by the Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group, an organization established by the governors of the G-10 central banks to promote the use of anti-counterfeit devices in the computer industry.
The inner workings of the counterfeit deterrence system are so secret that not even Adobe is privy to them. The Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group provides the software as a black box without revealing its precise inner workings, Connor said.
I blame the US Mint (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously, the US was like, one of the last countries to finally put watermarks in their bills. Even Turkey had watermarks before we did. Turkey!
Of course, their money is made out of crappier fibers; it doesn't hold up nearly as well as a US bill. From some people who are world travellers, I'm told the people in other countries don't even bother spot-checking a bill to see if it's genuine. They feel it with their hands. Apparently, tt's pretty easy to distinguish the real paper from the fake.
So, ultimately, I think that intricate designs are no longer going to stop counterfeiters. What's going to work is making the composite materials more difficult to mimic. What I think they should do, and I think this would probably work, is to weave the fibers so that there is contrast built into the paper weave itself which spells out the denomination: twenty, ten, etc. All you'd have to do is look at it from an angle or hold it to the light to see the weave. That would make it much, much more difficult to counterfeit.
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:3, Informative)
They didn't spend R&D time or money (Score:3, Informative)
Adobe doesn't even know how it works (it is a black box), not to mention having wasted any effort on it.
Re:Useless R&D increases cost (Score:2, Informative)
digital counterfeiting on the rise? (Score:5, Informative)
Correction: The proportion of counterfeit bills detected grew. I'm guessing that digital copies aren't as good as what the professionals use, and they're more easily detected -- the well made bills stay in circulation. Here's a cool pdf from the GAO [globalsecurity.org] that illustrates many types of counterfeits, including the superdollar.
Re:Economics (Score:3, Informative)
It's called the 'Elasticity of demand'
Central Banks will provide images (Score:3, Informative)
Re:not like we haven't seen this before (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, if you knew the law, you would know that just taking a bill "as is", putting your own photo in the middle and reprinting it is only legal when following certain guidelines [treas.gov].
You can't make true novelty money that's similar except for your photo, if you really wanted to, you would most likely want it double-sided. That's illegal in the US. Also, you'd have to make it a a certain degree larger or smaller than legal tender, so as it's not easily passable.
Re:Economics (Score:2, Informative)
Yea lets see. If I make a software program and it cost me $100,000,000 and I sell a Thousand copies I must recoup $100,000 a copy. But If I sell 100,000,000 copies I must recoup $1 a copy. Thus if I do a volume business Cost is hardly an issue
However if I raise the cost of my product 20% to cover the funky stuff with the government here, and my sales drop 20% that means I must recoup an additional >40% on the product. The economics here are pretty staggering if you think about it.
The Govenment had best get get over it. (Get a life) Photo copy technology is going to get a lot better. Even if you build into software a trap for the latest and greatest bills, next edition is wide open. Sorry Adobe but you should use your money for something else just like the suggestion says
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:5, Informative)
It seems like, from the backlash and speed problems of Photoshop CS, Photoshop 7 will be around for quite a while to come.
Re:$150,000 in R&D Dollars Flushed Down the To (Score:3, Informative)
European law proposed to require this (Score:3, Informative)
-
In the context of protecting euro banknotes against counterfeiting the European Central Bank (ECB)invites manufacturers
based in the European Union (EU)and importers or
distributors of products capable of handling digital images
(hereinafter 'the industry ') to submit comments in connection
with the ECB's request to the Commission of the European
Communities to initiate legislation making it mandatory to
incorporate counterfeit deterrence technology into such
products.Such legislation would apply to products produced,
imported or distributed in the EU.Any individual,organisation
or group of organisations may submit comments. [mailto]
The comment period closed December 19th, but it might still be worthwhile to send in comments if you're in the EU.Re:GIMP plugin? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:GIMP plugin? (Score:5, Informative)
Sure... Check out this image [cam.ac.uk] (warning, a PDF)...
On the 10 Euro note pictured, you can see the pattern VERY well, as the author connected the relevant 5-dot groupings with green lines.
It looks vaguely like the Cingular logo, IMO, or perhaps a little headless stick-figure.
On the US $20, the pattern appears using the zeros from the repeated background "20"s, or so I've read (I haven't personally verified it).
Re:not like we haven't seen this before (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, thank you. While you're at it, would you mind explaining how I just raised MY OWN FINGERPRINTS from a peice of paper not five minutes ago using some CrazyGlue and a toaster?
I admit the quality was was far from ideal. Parts of are quite clear and detailed and other parts are spotty. I am even able see the loops and whirls of one fingerprint on top of another fingerprint. And I'm not a law enforcement agency, I don't have a crime lab, I don't have real fingerprint equipment, I am not a fingerprint expert, I have ZERO training and ZERO real equipment. I'm just a random geek that happens to know that superglue vapors bind to fingerprints, and when heated it browns faster than plain paper. You then get a dark brown print image on lightly-tanned paper.
And just incase someone doesn't believe me, just look at any of the Google results for "fingerprints on paper". [google.com]
-
Please RTFA timothy! (Score:1, Informative)
Apparently timothy didn't make it to the second page, where it was clearly stated that the Central Bank made the software and gave it to graphic app developers as a black box.
Maybe someone should clue timothy into the fact that "editors" are supposed to edit, not editorialize.