5 ms·

“Apple’s iPad creates what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there”

25 points by jonathanzufi 5y ago

foolzcrow 5y ago
An expert testified that apple uses interpolation to enhance and upscale images. That interpolation did not alter the video in a substantial way. The lawyer was mentioning Apple 3d photo enhancement. Some of you that are laughing just don't realize Apple has deepfakes type software installed on iphones.
nameless912 5y ago
How in the world did a judge actually allow this argument to go forward? This is malpractice.
- guhidalg 5y ago
  Maybe he remembered hearing the word logarithms from high school math and thought “oh yes this fellow knows what he’s talking about, that’s an 11th grade word, I remember that from the Reagan years”
  - nameless912 5y ago
    I just keep thinking about "The FizzBuzz from Outer Space"[1] and I guess the guy became a lawyer after failing the interview?? [1]: https://thedailywtf.com/articles/the-fizz-buzz-from-outer-space https://thedailywtf.com/articles/the-fizz-buzz-from-outer-sp...
- freejazz 5y ago
  Judges can't commit malpractice, they do not represent anyone.
  - nameless912 5y ago
    I meant on the lawyer's part for making the argument in the first place. The judge is clearly not doing a good job here either though.
    - nradov 5y ago
      How is the judge clearly not doing a job? Instead of vague insinuations please provide a specific citation on how the judge has violated the rules of evidence for this exhibit.
      - freejazz 5y ago
        It'd be admissible because it impeaches Rittenhouse's testimony from that day. Also, hard to see how you could watch the video of the judge and think he's being reasonable.
- Rebelgecko 5y ago
  Perhaps the judge had read articles in the past about upsampling gone wrong (here's one that's also from the verge- https://www.theverge.com/21298762/face-depixelizer-ai-machine-learning-tool-pulse-stylegan-obama-bias https://www.theverge.com/21298762/face-depixelizer-ai-machin...). If the prosecution wanted to zoom in to show something that wasn't visible on the big TV, I think it's reasonable to be worried that whatever they want to show would be thrown off by sharpening algorithms or the rounding that happens when you blow up 97 pixels of video onto a 1920px screen
  - nameless912 5y ago
    Sure, but the lawyer confused algorithm for logarithm. Apparently (eyeroll) an expert needs to be brought in to explain to them that normal video zooming isn't going to cause AI-enabled upsampling.
    - Rebelgecko 5y ago
      Do you know what algorithm they use? Even non-ai algos like nearest neighbor vs bicubic can have drastically different outputs
bsaul 5y ago
this case is actually pretty interesting, since there are definitely more and more black box algorithms running on photo taking apps to enhance them. We globally know what they're doing but i remember very fondly a CS teacher in the 90s telling us how military refused to use anything based on neural nets because results were unprovables.
ryankrage77 5y ago
This is an insidious argument because there's a grain of truth in it. Photos/videos are heavily post-processed by Apples 'Neural engine' (https://github.com/hollance/neural-engine https://github.com/hollance/neural-engine) running on the Bionic chips, but this is done at the time of recording. Zooming the video to play it to the jury would just be simple linear scaling, and could be done on any device capable of playing & scaling a video. For example, the zoom or crop functions in VLC. > have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three-dimensions and logarithms a dangerous mix of incoherent buzzwords that's nearly correct.
- delif 5y ago
  Zooming into the video does not touch the neural engine. The standard video enhancements are described here .https://m.dpreview.com/articles/6780391159/all-apple-iphone-13-and-13-pro-camera-upgrades-explained https://m.dpreview.com/articles/6780391159/all-apple-iphone-... Please be factual and stop spreading FUD.
danw1979 5y ago
“Apple’s logarithms” faking footage is about the most crackpot thing I’ve heard all week. The fact a judge let this pass is incredible.
WalterGR 5y ago
Actual title: Judge buys Rittenhouse lawyer’s inane argument that Apple’s pinch-to-zoom manipulates footage
gillesjacobs 5y ago
True: For image CAPTURE on portable devices a lot of ML-based image processing is done. Unknown but unlikely: video PLAYBACK on iPad to use AI upscaling. A Google search does not provide a definitive answer to this, but in all likelihood linear upscaling is used. AI-based upscaling does exist though, look at the many plugins for MPV for instance. Surely, if Apple has implemented this in Quicktime video player it would be all over their marketing.
nradov 5y ago
This is a shit article by a lazy reporter who doesn't understand the rules of evidence in criminal trials. The judge is simply applying precedent here. Digital zoom does involve some manipulation of the original image. That manipulation is probably fine, but if the prosecution wants to introduce that evidence then they need to also provide an expert witness who can testify to that effect. If the prosecution failed to do so then they're incompetent and failed to do the necessary trial preparation.
jeffrallen 5y ago
Computer, "ENHANCE!" Sigh.

25 points by jonathanzufi 5y ago

An expert testified that apple uses interpolation to enhance and upscale images. That interpolation did not alter the video in a substantial way. The lawyer was mentioning Apple 3d photo enhancement. Some of you that are laughing just don't realize Apple has deepfakes type software installed on iphones.

nameless912 5y ago

How in the world did a judge actually allow this argument to go forward? This is malpractice.

guhidalg 5y ago
Maybe he remembered hearing the word logarithms from high school math and thought “oh yes this fellow knows what he’s talking about, that’s an 11th grade word, I remember that from the Reagan years”
- nameless912 5y ago
  I just keep thinking about "The FizzBuzz from Outer Space"[1] and I guess the guy became a lawyer after failing the interview?? [1]: https://thedailywtf.com/articles/the-fizz-buzz-from-outer-space https://thedailywtf.com/articles/the-fizz-buzz-from-outer-sp...
freejazz 5y ago
Judges can't commit malpractice, they do not represent anyone.
- nameless912 5y ago
  I meant on the lawyer's part for making the argument in the first place. The judge is clearly not doing a good job here either though.
  - nradov 5y ago
    How is the judge clearly not doing a job? Instead of vague insinuations please provide a specific citation on how the judge has violated the rules of evidence for this exhibit.
    - freejazz 5y ago
      It'd be admissible because it impeaches Rittenhouse's testimony from that day. Also, hard to see how you could watch the video of the judge and think he's being reasonable.
Rebelgecko 5y ago
Perhaps the judge had read articles in the past about upsampling gone wrong (here's one that's also from the verge- https://www.theverge.com/21298762/face-depixelizer-ai-machine-learning-tool-pulse-stylegan-obama-bias https://www.theverge.com/21298762/face-depixelizer-ai-machin...). If the prosecution wanted to zoom in to show something that wasn't visible on the big TV, I think it's reasonable to be worried that whatever they want to show would be thrown off by sharpening algorithms or the rounding that happens when you blow up 97 pixels of video onto a 1920px screen
- nameless912 5y ago
  Sure, but the lawyer confused algorithm for logarithm. Apparently (eyeroll) an expert needs to be brought in to explain to them that normal video zooming isn't going to cause AI-enabled upsampling.
  - Rebelgecko 5y ago
    Do you know what algorithm they use? Even non-ai algos like nearest neighbor vs bicubic can have drastically different outputs

bsaul 5y ago

this case is actually pretty interesting, since there are definitely more and more black box algorithms running on photo taking apps to enhance them. We globally know what they're doing but i remember very fondly a CS teacher in the 90s telling us how military refused to use anything based on neural nets because results were unprovables.

ryankrage77 5y ago

This is an insidious argument because there's a grain of truth in it. Photos/videos are heavily post-processed by Apples 'Neural engine' (https://github.com/hollance/neural-engine https://github.com/hollance/neural-engine) running on the Bionic chips, but this is done at the time of recording. Zooming the video to play it to the jury would just be simple linear scaling, and could be done on any device capable of playing & scaling a video. For example, the zoom or crop functions in VLC. > have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three-dimensions and logarithms a dangerous mix of incoherent buzzwords that's nearly correct.

delif 5y ago
Zooming into the video does not touch the neural engine. The standard video enhancements are described here .https://m.dpreview.com/articles/6780391159/all-apple-iphone-13-and-13-pro-camera-upgrades-explained https://m.dpreview.com/articles/6780391159/all-apple-iphone-... Please be factual and stop spreading FUD.

danw1979 5y ago

“Apple’s logarithms” faking footage is about the most crackpot thing I’ve heard all week. The fact a judge let this pass is incredible.

WalterGR 5y ago

Actual title: Judge buys Rittenhouse lawyer’s inane argument that Apple’s pinch-to-zoom manipulates footage

gillesjacobs 5y ago

True: For image CAPTURE on portable devices a lot of ML-based image processing is done. Unknown but unlikely: video PLAYBACK on iPad to use AI upscaling. A Google search does not provide a definitive answer to this, but in all likelihood linear upscaling is used. AI-based upscaling does exist though, look at the many plugins for MPV for instance. Surely, if Apple has implemented this in Quicktime video player it would be all over their marketing.

nradov 5y ago

This is a shit article by a lazy reporter who doesn't understand the rules of evidence in criminal trials. The judge is simply applying precedent here. Digital zoom does involve some manipulation of the original image. That manipulation is probably fine, but if the prosecution wants to introduce that evidence then they need to also provide an expert witness who can testify to that effect. If the prosecution failed to do so then they're incompetent and failed to do the necessary trial preparation.

jeffrallen 5y ago

Computer, "ENHANCE!" Sigh.