LEAF ON THE WIND IOS FULL
LEAF ON THE WIND IOS SOFTWARE

Hey, it's great that the foreground leaf looks realistic to you.

it is clearly and realistically BLUE' - doesn't actually add to the discussion. In other words, saying 'Am I crazy? I don't see why there's debate about the dress being blue or white when. Consider that the actual person who took the original photo didn't realize it was a real foreground leaf. because the blurriness keeps hijacking the brain to make it look like a fake artifact. In this very thread, there are commenters who still don't see 'clear depictions' of a realistic foreground leaf even after being made aware of parallax demonstration in the update. You still seem to be missing why this discussion of AI error was even possible.

LEAF ON THE WIND IOS SOFTWARE

Image saving algorithm with a software bug can cause pixels to be incorrectly 'replaced' even though the programmers never intended it:ĮDIT reply to: >, especially when the image so clearly depicts that. If it looked 100% realistic to everyone, we wouldn't be in this thread discussing it.Į.g. The unnaturalness of the pixels is what makes it plausible for Apple software to have a bug. For many observers, it does not look realistic. Well, that's the crux of the issue that you don't seem to see. That strategy is much more widely applicable, more robust against even intentional deceptions and leads to ultimately better understanding of the world. Read the weird twitter thread purporting to show the weird bug and think: What if the twitter user is mistaken? Is it possible that the picture doesn't show what they think it shows? What other possible explanations there are? And so on and so on. They should stay curious, let a lot of information in their head, but engage in critical thinking. The problem is not being curious, but drawing hasty conclusions and believing the wrong thing. Which basically says: I should be less curious because look here, I ended up believing the wrong thing. When they realised that it is unsupported they said (direct quote) 'I need to be more careful about what I click on (and let into my head.' The data is not wrong, your conclusion is wrong. If your conclusion from that is that 'iphones has AI magic which overlays leafs on faces for sure' that is your hasty conclusion and it is on you. Twitter user X attached a snippet of the image and said they think the iphone can overlay leafs in certain circumstances over faces. Twitter user X said their iphone did a funny thing. > They just said wrong data makes them (and others) more likely to make mistakes in the future.įirst of all, there is no wrong data here. If your thinking processes get damaged by encountering as of yet unexplained phenomenon then your brain is broken and you should ask for a refund. This is normal and part of the process of reasoning about the world.

LEAF ON THE WIND IOS FULL

For every eureka moment, there is a bin full of superluminal neutrino experiments. People investigated, and it turned out that that is not the case.įor every breakthrough in our understanding there were thousands of perhaps and maybes. This is why it could be possible that maybe something similar happens with the camera app. In the past we have seen that such complex pipelines can introduce plausible looking artefacts in a different context.

You shoot a picture and complicated processes happen which were optimised by thousands of engineers to produce a good looking photo. We know that modern imaging equipment is very complex. This particular instance looked more convincing. Most of that noise can be easily discarded, some look more convincing. For every 'real discovery' there is a ton of noise. Life is, among other things, a constant quest to better understand the world around us. What kind of thing do you mean by 'this type of thing'? Why do you think it degrades bayesian priors? I'm sure this type of thing degrades bayesian priors for everyone reading it

Leaf on the wind ios