this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
958 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

60044 readers
2658 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
958
Court Bans Use of 'AI-Enhanced' Video Evidence Because That's Not How AI Works (gizmodo.com)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
233 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
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I do not consider guided pattern recognition to be intelligence.

That's a you problem, this debate happened 50 years ago and we decided Intelligence is the right word.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Good thing there have been no significant changes to technology, psychology, philosophy, or society in the past 50 years.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Fallacious reasoning.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You forget that we can change these definitions any time we see fit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You cannot, because you are not a scientist and judging from your statements, you do not know what you're talking about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

It seems you are sadly stuck in your own thought patterns.

It does not take a scientist to change things. It takes a society to change definitions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

We could... if it made any sense to do so, which it doesn't.