Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2013 November 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Computing desk
< November 23 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 25 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


November 24[edit]

Issue with digital photographs all coming out white[edit]

Hi there, folks:

Today, I went on a day out, where, unfortunately, my camera - which had been working perfectly fine outside before - decided to stop working. The issue is that, whilst taking photographs outside, the picture appears to be almost entirely white, with few of the details that I intended to capture appearing. I imagined that this was an issue with white balance, but even in the mode wherein the white balance is manually set, the same thing happened - almost entirely white pictures such as this here. Inside, the picture quality was not as good as usual, but at least did not produce entirely white pictures - however, something unusual happened in the preview mode: dark bars would appear, then disappear, on the photograph. I resorted to taking videos and capturing images from the videos, and while taking videos, there were no issues with whiteness. Does anyone know what the cause of this is and what the resolution could be? It made for a frustrating experience.

All the best,

--188.78.106.5 (talk) 01:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

This is not an issue with white balance. It is an issue with the image exposure. More specifically, it looks like your camera is over-exposing the image. The first thing to check is whether you accidentally set a manual exposure mode with improper settings.
Tomorrow I might take a longer look at the image, but at a first glance, I am inclined to attribute this specific exposure problem to a defective or malfunctioning CCD sensor. I conclude this because the image artifacts are interlaced (characteristic of recent era CCD sensors), and there appears to be over-exposure only on certain rows. That would imply that the sensor is either ignoring commands to correctly set integration time, or is receiving incorrect exposure commands (due to a software error in the camera's controller). It is also possible that the corruption is occurring during a post-processing phase; there might be no hardware defect at all. If any of these are the root-cause, there is unfortunately very little that you can do, except to complain to the retailer or manufacturer and ask for a refund. Nimur (talk) 08:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I booted up my computer to stare at the image and scrutinize a few more technical details... yes, this is a photograph from the Samsung ST45 (known by many other names in some countries). And, regrettably, the EXIF indicates that the camera software provided reasonable settings to the sensor (not incorrect manual-exposure settings). This means that either: the camera software has a major bug, and does not send the sensor the commands it thinks it sends; or, the camera sensor hardware is defective, and does not set up its circuitry correctly when it receives a command; or, the camera post-processing software is defective. You might be able to "work around" some of these problems by switching the camera into a different mode, but ultimately, these are technical problems that an end-user cannot really resolve. Nimur (talk) 08:43, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, Nimur - thanks for taking a look at the photo and its data for me, I appreciate it. I had a feeling that it was something more severe, as I tried resetting the exposure and other settings that were available to be changed manually in vain. I've had some rotten luck with cameras lately - the first was robbed from my house by a burlgar, the second fell prey to a "zoom error" that I couldn't get fixed, and now this. I bought it in a second-hand shop, so hopefully I can return it! All the best and thanks for your time, --188.78.106.5 (talk) 10:46, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The image metadata appears to say the picture is exposed at f/3.0, 1/160 seconds, ISO 80. Those seem rather a lot for daylight. Could be the camera is set to over-expose. Try resetting the camera's settings - a quick googling suggests remove the memory card, then press and hold shutter and power button for several seconds. Or if that's not the reset see the camera's manual or google. 88.112.41.6 (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Immunicity ?[edit]

Someone recommended Immunicity to redirect my traffic and avoid webpage blocks the other day. Should i be concernced about my traffic going throught their servers or do they have a good reputation? Thanks Jenova20 (email) 12:46, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Immunicity provides a "free-to-use" public open proxy. There is always a risk when you use a proxy server; the proxy operator can see your traffic. If most of your traffic uses SSL or TLS security, you significantly reduce the risk that the proxy operator can eavesdrop on your data. But the server operator will still know several pieces of information, such as which websites you are accessing (even if the website data is encrypted). A proxy server provides a more straightforward entry point for a man in the middle attack, which (if executed) can even compromise securely encrypted data.
I do not recommend any third-party open proxy servers. If you don't control the hardware, and you don't have a business-relationship with the operator, there is almost no accountability, if they turn out to be malicious eavesdroppers. But not everybody is as paranoid and cynical as I am; not everybody's network data requires strong protection against eavesdroppers. You can decide for yourself whether you have enough technical understanding, and if you care about your data integrity, to trust them. Nimur (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's pretty stark...I think i'll reconsider my options. Thanks Nimur Jenova20 (email) 10:43, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Unwanted pop-ups.[edit]

Hello there,

My OS is Windows 7 on both of my machines. On one machine (mine) I run Microsoft Security Essentials(MSE) as well as SpyBot Search and Destroy (SB S&D) free application. As a matter of fact the last time I ran MSE was yesterday. It said it found no malware. Every time I run SB S&D it finds some kind of advertising leach which I destroy but next time I run SB S&D again it is there. And I don't go any dark places. No sex sites, no nothing, not even amazon.com on this machine. It is mostly for email. I also browse msn.com and read their articles.

My second machine is my wife's computer. I also use it frequently mostly to check the news at msn.com, that's it, and also I use her email account with her consent of course. I run SB S&D on it and every time I run it it comes out totally clean. The hardware is identical, it is both Dell T7400, relatively old but still rather powerful because when I ordered them I packed them both with top of the line blocks.

My wife's machine operates OK. On my machine I have unexpected pop-ups. They are aggressive and provocative. It is mostly about "warnings." Like: "You are running out of disk space. Click here and we will fix it." I have enough disk space for my needs: 104 GB free. On another occasion it is about my computer's speed. They offer to increase it dramatically. Those popups cover some of the web page I am reading and frequently they appear in pairs. They flash menacingly. I hate them. I am also afraid to click "OK" button accidentally. The popups never bother me when I read something in Wikipedia. It is only when I click on a link on the home page of msn.com.

I just checked my "Internet Properties. Privacy Tab" "Turn on Pop-up Blocker" is ON. That checkbox is checked. Disable toolbars and extensions when InPrivate browsing starts HAS BEEN checked. I don't know what it means though.

"Never allow websites to request your physical location" was OFF. I decided to leave it OFF. Is it about the IP address?

On my wife's machine I've never had any pesky pop-ups. I just checked the Privacy Tab on Internet Properties. Unlike on my machine, "Never allow websites to request your physical location" is ON. Also other two checkboxes are checked. Is it the cause of the problem?

Now's the question: Why do I have this pestilence? How to get rid of them? Why do I have it on only one machine? What is wrong with this one?

Thanks, 174.52.14.15 (talk) 19:56, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

You need some more heavy duty virus detection and elimination programs. I'd recommend TDSKiller, SuperAntiSpyware, Malwarebytes. I'd also recommend going to [www.bleepingcomputer.com/‎ bleepingcomputer.com] or some other specialist virus removal site people there will walk you through a thorough virus removal process. Also check any extensions in your browser and remove them.--User:Salix alba (talk): 00:55, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I've read your message. Thank you but I need to contemplate it all tomorrow. May come up with additional questions. You think it is a virus. Wow! Thanks, 174.52.14.15 (talk) 03:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

It may not be a virus, but either way you should have a competent Antivirus, and MSE is not. There are plenty of free options, which include AVG and Avast also. Thanks Jenova20 (email) 10:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for information. Very helpful. Now I have to follow.174.52.14.15 (talk) 02:28, 26 November 2013 (UTC)