Maybe people just want to have some fun? Send a secret picture only to their friends? Or maybe they want to send an image while hiding it from a government censor? I'm sure you can come up with more examples if you use your imagination.

Besides complaining about the potential use for child pornography is bizarre. If someone wanted to secretly send child porn to someone else, they could just encrypt it. It would be far more effective than this image packing method.

>If someone wanted to secretly send X to someone else, they could just encrypt it. It would be far more effective than this image packing method.

You're making a case against steganography?

No and I'm a bit unclear how you inferred that. I am, however, making the claim that embedded images similar to the blog post are much easier to discover than it is to break encryption. Does that clarify things for you?

A reporter might want to hide images that could be considered regime critical if they might be searched. Lots of nice pictures of healthy patriotic people, no suffering and starving people, empty shelves or grass stealing beggars to see.

Or without leaving the country you might want to hide pictures of animal abuse if you took them without permission from the owner, in some places documenting animal abuse is even more illegal than committing it. Look at all those funny cat pictures, no cows rotting in their own shit to see officer.

You could do that by hiding a document in any other document with existing tools. A picture in a picture is pretty specific to the format of most online media consumption.