AI for night photos: How it works in smartphones. https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/05/tech/smartphone-night-photography/index.html...

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

How it works in smartphones.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/05/tech/smartphone-night-photography/index.html

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I don't think that is "AI".
The phone is just programmed to differentiate noise.

User ID

Longshadow wrote:

I don't think that is "AI".
The phone is just programmed to differentiate noise.

"AI" is now just another "politicized" buzz word term. Current usage has stripped it of its real meaning.

You can load a digital device with all the available data pertaining to its purpose, but if the device doesnt actually *learn* then theres no AI involved.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

User ID wrote:

"AI" is now just another "politicized" buzz word term. Current usage has stripped it of its real meaning.

You can load a digital device with all the available data pertaining to its purpose, but if the device doesnt actual *learn* then theres no AI involved.

The camera is not learning, it is simply processing the image by a predefined algorithm.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Longshadow wrote:

I don't think that is "AI".
The phone is just programmed to differentiate noise.

Call it what you may, I thought it was a decent layman's description of what the camera was doing. Every single camera could eventually be programmed to do this, to take a picture in "available dark".

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

gvarner wrote:

Call it what you may, I thought it was a decent layman's description of what the camera was doing. Every single camera could eventually be programmed to do this, to take a picture in "available dark".

Key operator: programmed. The camera is following a program, which will not change itself (adapt) based on what it encounters. Which is not AI.

You can erroneously call it AI if you'd rather, but I won't.
Would you consider Microsoft's Word AI? Or any computer?

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

User ID wrote:

"AI" is now just another "politicized" buzz word term. Current usage has stripped it of its real meaning.

You can load a digital device with all the available data pertaining to its purpose, but if the device doesnt actually *learn* then theres no AI involved.

THIS is one of the main problems with AI.... Everyone has a different Idea of WHAT it is and MOST people are misguided...

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Longshadow wrote:

Key operator: programmed. The camera is following a program, which will not change itself (adapt) based on what it encounters. Which is not AI.

You can erroneously call it AI if you'd rather, but I won't.
Would you consider Microsoft's Word AI? Or any computer?

The simple test would be to take nighttime photographs over time, using the same phone and the same technique every time. If the photographic results become progressively "better," then we could say that the phone is implementing AI. If they remain roughly the same, then no.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

larryepage wrote:

The simple test would be to take nighttime photographs over time, using the same phone and the same technique every time. If the photographic results become progressively "better," then we could say that the phone is implementing AI. If they remain roughly the same, then no.

(And same conditions)

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

MrBob wrote:

THIS is one of the main problems with AI.... Everyone has a different Idea of WHAT it is and MOST people are misguided...

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Longshadow wrote:

Key operator: programmed. The camera is following a program, which will not change itself (adapt) based on what it encounters. Which is not AI.

You can erroneously call it AI if you'd rather, but I won't.
Would you consider Microsoft's Word AI? Or any computer?

I’m not insisting on calling it AI, I’m saying that you or anyone can call it what you want. I’m simply pointing out that the article does a good job of describing what it does. It’s like some folks being unwilling to refer to a computer that's packaged with a camera and a phone as a "real camera". Perhaps A(dvanced) C(amera) C(omputing) would be a better monicker. I’m impressed with the technology. A name is just a name.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

gvarner wrote:

I’m not insisting on calling it AI, I’m saying that you or anyone can call it what you want. I’m simply pointing out that the article does a good job of describing what it does. It’s like some folks being unwilling to refer to a computer that's packaged with a camera and a phone as a "real camera". Perhaps A(dvanced) C(amera) C(omputing) would be a better monicker. I’m impressed with the technology. A name is just a name.

But you did refer to it as such.
Unfortunately we don't know your interpretation.

Yea, A(dvanced) C(amera) C(omputing) would be more appropriate.

Thanks, Bob.
(It's just a name, right?

)

User ID

Longshadow wrote:

But you did refer to it as such.
Unfortunately we don't know your interpretation.

Yea, A(dvanced) C(amera) C(omputing) would be more appropriate.

Howbout "Digital Systematic Luminosity Reception" ? The acronym will be up for grabs any day now.

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

Longshadow wrote:

I don't think that is "AI".
The phone is just programmed to differentiate noise.

Absolutely correct! The phone is not using AI - it's using (in each iteration) the result of the manufacturer's possible use of AI during creation of the phone's improved picture taking/processing software (IPTPS). This may be present in upgrades within a given model, or from model to model, as they learn how to do things better - for most people.

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

So the real question becomes is digital AI of any kind really intelligent? All of it operates on human instructions. Is it learning as we know it in humans beyond the algorithms that humans have created?