• wewbull@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Not a photo.

    It’s the output of an AI model trained on simulations of black holes being asked to fill in the gaps from sparse observations.

    • Riverside@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Someone: takes a selfie with their phone under low lighting conditions

      You: "not a photo, it’s the output of an algorithm taking the luminosity from an array of light detectors, giving information of the colour and modifying it according to lighting conditions, and then using specific software to sharpen the original capture*

      • Tamo240@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        57 minutes ago

        Its not hard to find that there are legitimate academic criticism of this ‘photo’. For example here. The comparison you made is not correct, more like I gave a blurry photo to an AI trained on paintings of Donald Trump and asked it to make an image of him. Even if the original image was not of Trump, the chances are the output will be because that’s all the model was trained on.

        This is the trouble with using this as ‘proof’ that the. Theory and the simulations are correct, because while that is still likely, there is a feedback loop causing confirmation bias here, especially when people refer to this image as a ‘photo’.