“AI”
Sharpening, Denoising and upscaling barely count as machine learning. They don’t require AI neural networks.
Sharpening is a simple convolution, doesn’t even count as ML.
I really hate that everything gets the AI label nowadays
The “ai bad” brainrot has everyone thinking that any algorithm is AI and all AI is ChatGPT.
just today someone told me that Vocaloid was also AI music, they are either too dumb to make some basic fact-checking or true believers trying to hype up AI by any means necessary
My simple rule is that if it uses a neural network model of some kind, then it can be accurately called AI.
Thisthisthis
They don’t require AI neural networks.
Sharpening and denoising don’t. But upscalers worth anything do require neural nets.
Anything that uses a neural network is the definition of AI.
Not true
Company I used to work for had excellent upscalers running on FPGAs that they developed 20+ years ago.
The algorithms have been there for years, just AI gives it bit of marketing sprinkle to something that has been a solved problem for years.
Well, the algorithms that make up many neural networks have existed for over 60 years. It’s only recently that hardware has been able to make it happen.
AI gives it bit of marketing sprinkle to something that has been a solved problem for years.
Not true and I did say “any upscaler that’s worth anything”. Upscaling tech has existed at least since digital video was a thing. Pixel interpolation is the simplest and computationally easiest method. But it tends to give a slight hazy appearance.
It’s actually far from a solved problem. There’s a constant trade-off beyond processing power and quality. And quality can still be improved by a lot.
at least since digital video
Right. Even back in the eighties UK broadcasters were “upscaling” American NTSC 480i60 shows to 576i50. The results were varied. High-ticket shows like Friends and Fraiser looked great, albeit a bit soft and oversaturated, while live news feeds looked terrible. If you’ve never seen it, The Day Today has a perfect example of what a lot of US programmes lookd like converted to PAL.
Ya, I knew there were analogue “upscalers”, but I’m not familiar enough with them to confidently call them an upscaler vs a signal converter.
Barely count or not they absolutely ruin every piece of media I’ve seen them used in. They make people look like wax figures and turn text into gibberish.
But you can use AI for that
I’m huge into makeup, and I watch a lot of beauty content on YouTube because I want to see how certain makeup looks and performs before I buy it. This AI bullshit defeats the purpose of demonstrating makeup.
Knowing Google, they care more about blurring the lines between AI and reality to confuse and force it onto people than they do about saving a few dollars on storage costs.
It’s very likely to do with compression codecs to save money.
Ostensibly, yes. Just like the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism.
I KNEW THOSE SHORTS I’VE BEEN WATCHING HAD THE “AI LOOK” GOD-DAMNIT! With the smooth faces and the weird plastic looking contrast.
yucky, shorts lol
deleted by creator
Well, who would have doubted it? Fuck, 1984 is already here.
This is shitty journalism that massively distorts what actually happened. It’s just traditional video filters, and AI panic.
There is no AI panic. There is a distrust against the intention of the companies pushing it. Can you trust Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, Anthropic etc?
There is an AI panic, just like there was a microprocessor panic 50 years ago. Distrust and panic are different things. There is also AI distrust. There is also an AI revolution, an AI bubble, and a whole new AI epoch. There’s lots of AI shit going on right now, and panic is certainly one of them.
This article is AI panic because it’s what we would call a hallucination if an LLM wrote it. There is no AI in this story. People in a panic often jump at nothing.
Legitimate critique of this demonic technology is not FUD!
