4 ms·

So you need a big enough screen to cover the entire field of view at 16 ft? Sounds expensive

by gruez 16d ago

BugsJustFindMe 16d ago
Well, first, that's only expensive if you're poor. The world is absolutely full of people who can easily piss away your entire annual income throwing a house party. But I really mean that if the lidar barely works outdoors anyway then actually you don't need to be 16 feet away at all. Anyway, one may presume that they've thought about this.
- somethinsfishy 16d ago
  Put some sugar on it. Please.
  - BugsJustFindMe 16d ago
    Def Leppard, is that you?
- brookst 16d ago
  Thought about it and also are bright enough not to fall for the “if a single person dies wearing a seat belt, we should abandon seat belts because they do no good at all” fallacy. It’s almost certainly possible to fool v1 of this system, for some images, in some contexts. It would be shocking if the first implementation was completely perfect. But maybe it’s better than nothing?
  - BugsJustFindMe 16d ago
    > But maybe it’s better than nothing? I think this will depend on how it gets used. I can imagine numerous outcomes where it's in fact worse than nothing (significantly more effective blackmail, for instance).
    - brookst 15d ago
      I guess? The bailey version of that argument is that we should do away with the concept of truth altogether, because some truths are harmful.
  - akersten 16d ago
    > maybe it’s better than nothing? While that is not quite my bar of confidence when implementing wide-reaching technologies that have numerous unexplored knock-on effects, I guess the calculus must have been different on Infinite Loop recently.
  - dd8601fn 16d ago
    I like that seatbelt argument example. I’ve seen that type of argument a million times, and I’ll certainly reuse that.
  - MisterKent 16d ago
    The problem is that if defeating it is trivial, then it _authenticates_ fake images. The problem is that it makes it easier to fool people and provide "cryptographic" evidence of validity, backed by big tech. It's purpose is to stop bad actors from passing of fake as real just as much as it is to prevent real images being dismissed as fake.
  - alwillis 16d ago
    > It’s almost certainly possible to fool v1 of this system, for some images, in some contexts. It would be shocking if the first implementation was completely perfect. Knowing Apple, they've been working on and testing Apple Reference Image for years. It being perfect isn't the issue; it's that random people on the internet who are just learning about this assume Apple's engineers haven't already thought about everything (and more) mentioned in this thread.
    - archagon 16d ago
      If they thought about it, then why isn't this very obvious failure point even mentioned in the technical breakdown?
    - ben_w 16d ago
      > It being perfect isn't the issue; it's that random people on the internet who are just learning about this assume Apple's engineers haven't already thought about everything (and more) mentioned in this thread. Given how many bugs there are in macOS and how long they have remained there, I (who have been writing iOS apps from the release of the first retina iPod touch until AI got good) functionally agree with such people; at best, I think Apple's engineers haven't actually solved everything (and more) mentioned in this thread, even if every one of these things may have come up in discussions and even reached an official backlog or task list or similar.
  - mitxela 15d ago
    It's bad to begin with that Apple should be the arbiters of reality.
  - croon 13d ago
    If fake images get certified as real, that's a net negative compared to now where the verification boils down to chain of trust.
nomel 16d ago
Or, probably just some optics, like a slanted $9 IR mirror [1] in front of it, to direct the lidar to the sky/absorption box. Then you can point at the high res HDR TV that's probably already in your living room. [1] https://commonlands.com/products/ir-cut-filters-csp650?srsltid=AU7gw4X-pCzrQspQzH18g1_O281WPxL3N-zhy48Usxf-IMb8Ctbs45Bk https://commonlands.com/products/ir-cut-filters-csp650?srslt...

So you need a big enough screen to cover the entire field of view at 16 ft? Sounds expensive

by gruez 16d ago

So you need a big enough screen to cover the entire field of view at 16 ft? Sounds expensive

Well, first, that's only expensive if you're poor. The world is absolutely full of people who can easily piss away your entire annual income throwing a house party. But I really mean that if the lidar barely works outdoors anyway then actually you don't need to be 16 feet away at all. Anyway, one may presume that they've thought about this.

somethinsfishy 16d ago
Put some sugar on it. Please.
- BugsJustFindMe 16d ago
  Def Leppard, is that you?
brookst 16d ago
Thought about it and also are bright enough not to fall for the “if a single person dies wearing a seat belt, we should abandon seat belts because they do no good at all” fallacy. It’s almost certainly possible to fool v1 of this system, for some images, in some contexts. It would be shocking if the first implementation was completely perfect. But maybe it’s better than nothing?
- BugsJustFindMe 16d ago
  > But maybe it’s better than nothing? I think this will depend on how it gets used. I can imagine numerous outcomes where it's in fact worse than nothing (significantly more effective blackmail, for instance).
  - brookst 15d ago
    I guess? The bailey version of that argument is that we should do away with the concept of truth altogether, because some truths are harmful.
- akersten 16d ago
  > maybe it’s better than nothing? While that is not quite my bar of confidence when implementing wide-reaching technologies that have numerous unexplored knock-on effects, I guess the calculus must have been different on Infinite Loop recently.
- dd8601fn 16d ago
  I like that seatbelt argument example. I’ve seen that type of argument a million times, and I’ll certainly reuse that.
- MisterKent 16d ago
  The problem is that if defeating it is trivial, then it _authenticates_ fake images. The problem is that it makes it easier to fool people and provide "cryptographic" evidence of validity, backed by big tech. It's purpose is to stop bad actors from passing of fake as real just as much as it is to prevent real images being dismissed as fake.
- alwillis 16d ago
  > It’s almost certainly possible to fool v1 of this system, for some images, in some contexts. It would be shocking if the first implementation was completely perfect. Knowing Apple, they've been working on and testing Apple Reference Image for years. It being perfect isn't the issue; it's that random people on the internet who are just learning about this assume Apple's engineers haven't already thought about everything (and more) mentioned in this thread.
  - archagon 16d ago
    If they thought about it, then why isn't this very obvious failure point even mentioned in the technical breakdown?
  - ben_w 16d ago
    > It being perfect isn't the issue; it's that random people on the internet who are just learning about this assume Apple's engineers haven't already thought about everything (and more) mentioned in this thread. Given how many bugs there are in macOS and how long they have remained there, I (who have been writing iOS apps from the release of the first retina iPod touch until AI got good) functionally agree with such people; at best, I think Apple's engineers haven't actually solved everything (and more) mentioned in this thread, even if every one of these things may have come up in discussions and even reached an official backlog or task list or similar.
- mitxela 15d ago
  It's bad to begin with that Apple should be the arbiters of reality.
- croon 13d ago
  If fake images get certified as real, that's a net negative compared to now where the verification boils down to chain of trust.

nomel 16d ago

Or, probably just some optics, like a slanted $9 IR mirror [1] in front of it, to direct the lidar to the sky/absorption box. Then you can point at the high res HDR TV that's probably already in your living room. [1] https://commonlands.com/products/ir-cut-filters-csp650?srsltid=AU7gw4X-pCzrQspQzH18g1_O281WPxL3N-zhy48Usxf-IMb8Ctbs45Bk https://commonlands.com/products/ir-cut-filters-csp650?srslt...