Technology

59756 readers

3085 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

960

Court Bans Use of 'AI-Enhanced' Video Evidence Because That's Not How AI Works (gizmodo.com)

submitted 8 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

222 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@lemmy.one 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Sure, no algorithm is able to extract any more information from a single photo. But how about combining detail caught in multiple frames of video? Some phones already do this kind of thing, getting multiple samples for highly zoomed photos thanks to camera shake.

Still, the problem remains that the results from a cherry-picked algorithm or outright hand-crafted pics may be presented.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Depends on implementation, if done properly and if they don't try to upscale and deblur too much then that kind of interpolation between multiple frames can be useful to extract more detail. If it's a moving subject then this type of zoom can create false results because the algorithm can't tell the difference and will think it's an optical artifact. For stationary subjects and photographers it can be useful