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?

  • tankfox@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Rick and Morty did this once, Rick simply put on a hat with a QR code that made a robot army recognize him as a high level commander.

    A few days ago I read a short story, comp.basilisk.faq by David Langford, which sketched a world in which specific images could irreversibly crash the brain, leading to a full scale worldwide ban on images on the internet and many other places as well. The story postulated hundreds of potential info-hazards with many of them simple enough to be applied via stencil and spray paint. Two of them are branch families of the Mandelbrot set ‘and no we won’t tell you where, do not look’

    Other examples;

    • Snow Crash — Neal Stephenson
    • Blit — David Langford
    • The Atrocity Archives — Charles Stross
    • Doctor Who — “Blink” / “The Time of the Doctor”
    • SCP Foundation — SCP-096
    • SCP-7387 (“The Mathematician’s Grin”)

    “Keep your eyes peeled or we’ll peel them for you wholesale!”