Court Bans Use of 'AI-Enhanced' Video Evidence Because That's Not How AI Works - eviltoast
This AI hype cycle has dramatically distorted society's views of what's possible with image upscalers.

A judge in Washington state has blocked video evidence that’s been “AI-enhanced” from being submitted in a triple murder trial. And that’s a good thing, given the fact that too many people seem to think applying an AI filter can give them access to secret visual data.

  • Downcount@lemmy.worldEnglish
    221·
    9 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.

    • Bobby Turkalino@lemmy.yachtsEnglish
      121·
      9 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

      • pm_me_ur_thoughts@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        9 months ago

        Okay, I’m not disagreeing with you about the fact that its all math.

        However, interpolation or pixels is simple math. AI generated is complex math and is only as good as its training data.

        The licence example is a good one. In interpolation, it’ll just find some average, midpoint, etc and fill the pixel. In AI gen, if the training set had your number plate 999 times in a set of 1000, it will generate your numberplate no matter whose plate you input. to use it as evidence would need it to be far more deterministic than the probabilistic nature of AI gen content.