I mean we “invent” pixels anyway for pretty much all digital photography based on Bayer filters.
But the answer is linear interpolation. That’s where we draw the line.
Comment on Court Bans Use of 'AI-Enhanced' Video Evidence Because That's Not How AI Works
turkalino@lemmy.yachts 2 months agoBoth insert pixels that didn’t exist before, so where do we draw the line of how much of that is acceptable?
Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 months ago
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
What’s your bank account information? I’m either going to add or subtract a lot of money from it. Both alter your account balance so you should be fine with either right?
Downcount@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Look it this way: If you have an unreadable licence plate because of low resolution, interpolating won’t make it readable. An AI, on the other hand could just “invent” (I know, I know, normy speak in your eyes) a readable one.
You will draw yourself the line when you get your first ticket for speeding, when it wasn’t your car.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
License plates is an interesting case because with a known set of visual symbols (known fonts used by approved plate issuers) you can often accurately deblur even very very blurry text (but not with AI algorithms, but rather by modeling the blur of the cameras and the unique blur gradients this results in for each letter)
turkalino@lemmy.yachts 2 months ago
Interesting example, because tickets issued by automated cameras aren’t enforced in most places in the US. You can safely ignore those tickets and the police won’t do anything about it because they know how faulty these systems are and most of the cameras are owned by private companies anyway.
“Readable” is a subjective matter of interpretation, so again, I’m confused on how exactly you’re distinguishing good & pure fictional pixels from bad & evil fictional pixels
Downcount@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Being tickets enforced or not doesn’t change my argumentation nor invalidates it.
You are acting stubborn and childish. Everything there was to say has been said. If you still think you are right, do it, as you are not able or willing to understand. Let me be clear: I think you are trolling and I’m not in any mood to participate in this anymore.
turkalino@lemmy.yachts 2 months ago
Sorry, it’s just that I work in a field where making distinctions is based on math and/or logic, while you’re making a distinction between AI- and non-AI-based image interpolation based on opinion and subjective observation
abhibeckert@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Wait what? No.
It’s entirely possible if you ignore the ticket, a human might review it and find there’s insufficient evidence. But if, for example, you ran a red light and they have a photo that shows your number plate and your face… then you don’t want to ignore that ticket.