Fortunately I don't have a stupid phone.
I see on the app store it says "This version will replace any older versions and work with all Seek Compact products. It will
require one-time registration upon first use in APP entering basic information such as first name, last name, email, and
geolocation." and in the list of new features: "One-time product
registration to enable enhanced support & meet iTar compliance". This doesn't explain the ongoing login problem, but maybe it's how they get away with selling the new 15fps units. Maybe if you're in an unapproved location it disables the 15fps or won't let the thing run at all...which brings me to my next comment...
Thanks joe-c for the offer to answer questions. A web search for the image processing mode turned up a more recent version of cynfab's code that I had not seen before wherein he documented the commands so I already answered my own questions before I saw your post.
But now I'm scared, seriously...After I made that post I said "Dang!". What we just did there is exchange technical information on how to take a freely available, unrestricted item and turn it into an ITAR restricted device (as far as I understand the restrictions). I expect our governments would frown upon that being published to the world like this. While researching the matter in preparation for making this post. I even found specific reference to restrictions on software that defeated the 9fps limit in such cameras. I am surprised that Seek burned the patent pixels into their masks but left the frame rate in software.
If I am correct about this being an ITAR violation, we should delete the posts regarding the increased frame rate. The problem is not so much doing it for our own purposes, it's publishing it where anyone on the planet can get it. Like Fraser said a while back, why make it easy for our enemies.
I would like to hear Fraser's take on this, or others who are in-tune with the regulations, but if nobody can provide good reason why my fears are unfounded, I will drop out of the frame rate discussion. I was hesitant even to join the discussion about cleaning up the image because I feared that could be taken as applicable to restricted devices as well, but once I found many research papers (such as this one:
http://opticalengineering.spiedigitallibrary.org/article.aspx?articleid=2035077) on-line discussing that topic I decided it was safe to talk about it. ITAR penalties are extreme; I don't think any of us want to be a victim.
I still think it is safe to share my code, though.