5 ms·

This is an update to that post, with a new image with a moon and a half image of the moon together in one image. The full moon is enhanced, while the half imag

by chabes 4y ago

This is an update to that post, with a new image with a moon and a half image of the moon together in one image. The full moon is enhanced, while the half image remains blurry.

kazinator 4y ago
Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image and fills it with pixels from a canned image. This is a lot like the ages-old trick of a compiler being rigged to recognize particular source file (benchmark program) and pulls out a hand-optimized assembly program.
- to11mtm 4y ago
  > This is a lot like the ages-old trick of a compiler being rigged to recognize particular source file (benchmark program) and pulls out a hand-optimized assembly program. I never knew compilers did this, but I remember it being the case for some games (There was a debacle once upon a time where renaming 'Quake3.exe' to 'Quack3.exe' would reveal such shenanigans on some drivers.)
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    This is still the case with games, pretty much every new big release comes with an associated 'game ready driver' release where the driver can detect and adjust some behaviors to better suit that game.
    - kazinator 4y ago
      But that provides a real benefit whereas the compiler trick's objective is to look good in a benchmark.
  - remram 4y ago
    A less-evil example is that most compilers can recognize when you wrote a memcpy() and replace it with an actual memcpy() call, which is usually very carefully optimized for your specific processor. This can cause fun issues like your version of memcpy() (e.g. embedded libc) being replaced by the compiler with a call to itself: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
    - tialaramex 4y ago
      The ability to figure out what you're doing and then just do that well, rather than attempting to optimise the code you wrote is called Idiom Recognition and has been around for a very long time, like, 1970s or maybe before. A relatively modern example was people writing code to count set bits in a value, because older languages don't provide an intrinsic to do that and it's often useful, these days your CPU probably has a CPU instruction specifically for that, it's called "popcount" (sometimes spelled popcnt) and so it's valuable to recognise what's going on in the say six lines of C++ in your program and emit a single POPCOUNT instruction instead. If your fancy method to count bits isn't recognised your program goes slower. The memcpy case is special because C is weird in actually trying to define this as a function, copying memory is so commonly necessary that compilers need to have a pre-baked implementation for the rest of what they do anyway, it's not a surprise that idiom recognition results in your custom memcpy being turned into the built-in memcpy, although in the case you linked that's indeed a bug.
    - kazinator 4y ago
      That's due to the run-time and compiler being different projects. In Lisps it's not unusual to see (defun car (x) (car x)). Arguably, memcpy belongs in libgcc and not the C library. Glibc should not have to do anything in regard to memcpy, other than include the right compiler header in its stdlib.h.
- kgwgk 4y ago
  > Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image The hacky code runing right inside the phones detecting objects, identifying faces and whatnot is often called AI.
  - codeflo 4y ago
    Fucking single if statements are called AI these days. That's not a strong argument. :)
    - Dudeman112 4y ago
      That's because AI is an awful expression :| Should have always been called "fancy algorithms" from the get-go, calling it "intelligence" opens the interpretation up for a world of misunderstandings
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - basch 4y ago
        Do neural networks fall into the algorithm category? How do you do squinting between an engineered process and a discovered relationship. Because the neural networks are much closer to discovered than engineered.
        Dudeman112 4y ago
        Yes. Being engineered or not is completely orthogonal to the discussion >Because the neural networks are much closer to discovered than engineered So is most code. Programmers in general can't engineer for shit, (half blindly) guided trial and error is the most common development paradigm
    - ben30 4y ago
      My Samsung tumble dryer proudly tells me every time I turn it on, “optimised by AI”. But it’s not smart enough to know it’s told me that a hundred times before.
- avian 4y ago
  Check a comment in the Reddit comment thread. The author of the post repeats the experiment with a blurred and modified picture of the moon that has craters in wrong places. The phone produced a photo of the moon that is less blurry, but also has craters in wrong places. This suggests it's not just using a canned image.
- cscurmudgeon 4y ago
  > Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image and fills it with pixels from a canned image. This is actually a common mode of breakage of standard vision models.
- manojlds 4y ago
  Read the thread. Someone did with photoshopped crater and it enhanced that as well. It's like saying face recognition didn't recognized when you photoshopped a ear in the photo.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

by chabes 4y ago

This is an update to that post, with a new image with a moon and a half image of the moon together in one image. The full moon is enhanced, while the half image remains blurry.

kazinator 4y ago

Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image and fills it with pixels from a canned image. This is a lot like the ages-old trick of a compiler being rigged to recognize particular source file (benchmark program) and pulls out a hand-optimized assembly program.

to11mtm 4y ago
> This is a lot like the ages-old trick of a compiler being rigged to recognize particular source file (benchmark program) and pulls out a hand-optimized assembly program. I never knew compilers did this, but I remember it being the case for some games (There was a debacle once upon a time where renaming 'Quake3.exe' to 'Quack3.exe' would reveal such shenanigans on some drivers.)
- dotnet00 4y ago
  This is still the case with games, pretty much every new big release comes with an associated 'game ready driver' release where the driver can detect and adjust some behaviors to better suit that game.
  - kazinator 4y ago
    But that provides a real benefit whereas the compiler trick's objective is to look good in a benchmark.
- remram 4y ago
  A less-evil example is that most compilers can recognize when you wrote a memcpy() and replace it with an actual memcpy() call, which is usually very carefully optimized for your specific processor. This can cause fun issues like your version of memcpy() (e.g. embedded libc) being replaced by the compiler with a call to itself: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
  - tialaramex 4y ago
    The ability to figure out what you're doing and then just do that well, rather than attempting to optimise the code you wrote is called Idiom Recognition and has been around for a very long time, like, 1970s or maybe before. A relatively modern example was people writing code to count set bits in a value, because older languages don't provide an intrinsic to do that and it's often useful, these days your CPU probably has a CPU instruction specifically for that, it's called "popcount" (sometimes spelled popcnt) and so it's valuable to recognise what's going on in the say six lines of C++ in your program and emit a single POPCOUNT instruction instead. If your fancy method to count bits isn't recognised your program goes slower. The memcpy case is special because C is weird in actually trying to define this as a function, copying memory is so commonly necessary that compilers need to have a pre-baked implementation for the rest of what they do anyway, it's not a surprise that idiom recognition results in your custom memcpy being turned into the built-in memcpy, although in the case you linked that's indeed a bug.
  - kazinator 4y ago
    That's due to the run-time and compiler being different projects. In Lisps it's not unusual to see (defun car (x) (car x)). Arguably, memcpy belongs in libgcc and not the C library. Glibc should not have to do anything in regard to memcpy, other than include the right compiler header in its stdlib.h.
kgwgk 4y ago
> Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image The hacky code runing right inside the phones detecting objects, identifying faces and whatnot is often called AI.
- codeflo 4y ago
  Fucking single if statements are called AI these days. That's not a strong argument. :)
  - Dudeman112 4y ago
    That's because AI is an awful expression :| Should have always been called "fancy algorithms" from the get-go, calling it "intelligence" opens the interpretation up for a world of misunderstandings
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - basch 4y ago
      Do neural networks fall into the algorithm category? How do you do squinting between an engineered process and a discovered relationship. Because the neural networks are much closer to discovered than engineered.
      - Dudeman112 4y ago
        Yes. Being engineered or not is completely orthogonal to the discussion >Because the neural networks are much closer to discovered than engineered So is most code. Programmers in general can't engineer for shit, (half blindly) guided trial and error is the most common development paradigm
  - ben30 4y ago
    My Samsung tumble dryer proudly tells me every time I turn it on, “optimised by AI”. But it’s not smart enough to know it’s told me that a hundred times before.
avian 4y ago
Check a comment in the Reddit comment thread. The author of the post repeats the experiment with a blurred and modified picture of the moon that has craters in wrong places. The phone produced a photo of the moon that is less blurry, but also has craters in wrong places. This suggests it's not just using a canned image.
cscurmudgeon 4y ago
> Which shows you it's not "AI"; it's more like some hacky code running right inside the phone which detects a plausible moon-like object in the image and fills it with pixels from a canned image. This is actually a common mode of breakage of standard vision models.
manojlds 4y ago
Read the thread. Someone did with photoshopped crater and it enhanced that as well. It's like saying face recognition didn't recognized when you photoshopped a ear in the photo.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]