> Even smartphones do it automatically for you, digital post-processing to compensate for the limitations of the cameras.

The level of post-processing matters. There is a difference between color grading an image and removing wrinkles from a face.

The line is not cut clear but these companies are pushing the boundaries so we get used to fake imagery. That is not good.

▲

gruez 2 days ago | parent [-]

>There is a difference between color grading an image and removing wrinkles from a face.

You're implying the latter doesn't happen normally but denoising (which basically every smartphone camera does) often has the effect of removing details like wrinkles. The effect is especially pronounced in low light settings, where noise is the highest.

▲

Frieren 2 days ago | parent [-]

> but denoising (which basically every smartphone camera does) often has the effect of removing details like wrinkles.

I do not get the argument of "if nothing happens when an ant bites you then I can shot you with a cannon be cause it is the same thing just larger". The impact on society matters for me, and it is very different. Justifying AI at any cost is a marketing strategy that will hurt us long-term.

	▲	gruez a day ago \| parent [-]
		>I do not get the argument of "if nothing happens when an ant bites you then I can shot you with a cannon be cause it is the same thing just larger". this argument fails because at least in the examples provided, it's closer to the non-gen ai denoising/upscaling algorithms than telling chatgpt to upscale an image. >The impact on society matters for me, and it is very different. Justifying AI at any cost is a marketing strategy that will hurt us long-term. There's no indication it's AI, except some vague references to "machine learning".