I just watched a Netflix that Iām pretty sure was machine generated.
āWhat, they donāt have to tell you??ā
āIf you canāt tell you donāt need to know.ā
No, I havenāt watched the Ted yet.
2 Likes
Except meā¦ Since the conspiracy is that we are bots of each other with different user names.
True. In context though, his presentation addressed the depixilation and pixelation of images countless times and how machine learning has come to be able to do a good job at re-pixelating images or enhancing them. I think he was indicating that if something is blurry and there are enough surrounding pixels they can reasonably enhance some of it to be more recognizable. I admit thatās true. But the degree to which they do in the CSI and intelligence shows is laughingly not possible.
I guess if he was absolutely forced to say yes or no, and then yes is technically accurate, because they can enhance a lot of images based on machine learning. I mean, the new pixel 10 already does that by reviewing the surrounding blurry pictures and sharpening them with machine learning just like CSI enhancers would do. Examples:
(I will have this phone in about 3 weeksā¦ I didnāt order it on the launch day because I wanted to wait a couple of days for my Gemini Pro subscription to end so I could get another year of Gemini Pro for free 
)
So, yeah, CSI guys can do some machine learning enhancement like that, but itās still pretty limited. It canāt do what the TV shows do with turning two pixels into a 2000 pixel clear face of the perp. Thatās usually what people are talking about when they mention the long-standing enhance joke.
1 Like
Oh, right. Thanks for the reminder, @Self[1]! 
Oh, I know. I just enjoy playing devilās advocate sometimes and thinking through how that exchange played out and how it couldāve meant something that wasnāt apparent on the surface. Part of me wants to think he was being somewhat devious in his answer and having fun with the audience while technically giving an honest response to the question.
I know you like to play those analysis games, too. Yāknow how I know?[2] 
I dig. Jusā havinā fun. I liked the talk and thought it had the potential to spark some interesting thinking for more reasons than the main subject matter. In the past, Iāve actually used a one-pixel profile picture here. Maybe I should try a 2-pixel image and see what someone tries to enhance that to.[3] 
Fixed it for this caseā¦ 
And YES
I enjoy such
Done.
Isnāt that 2 color instead of 2 pixel?
Thatās a fair question. Itās both. Itās actually two pixels: 
.
The image that I uploaded looks smaller than the period at the end of that sentence as Iām composing this post. Itās 2 Ć 1 px, and the left and right colors are different. If I just use HTML to scale that same image (same upload/URL) 10Ć, it looks like this:
I donāt know if that gradient effect is browser-dependent or not, but as the image scales it appears to be even more than two colors as the gradient effect becomes more pronounced (scales) with the image size. If I put the URL for my profile picture at what appears to be Discourseās maximum native profile picture size, then I get this:
Thatās using https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/wyze/user_avatar/forums.wyze.com/crease/288/115398_2.png as the source URL because even if I substitute 999 where it has 288 it always reverts back to that, as if thatās the maximum size itās going to use.
Then Discourse applies CSS styling to round it out, and to me the final effect looks kind of like a planet, especially since I primary use the Dark Theme. I really had no idea what Discourse (and a Web browser) would do to it when I uploaded such a small image, and I did not at all expect to see the gradientāI thought it would be just a 2-color imageābut I really kinda dig it.
1 Like
Yeah, and the background animation imparts a subtle spin.
Youāre an adept.
1 Like
Iām a curious nerd who likes to play. Last night I experimented with some 1 Ć 6 px and 3 Ć 6 px (width Ć height) images as profile pictures just to see what the platform and browser would do, and those were okay, but I like this one better so farā¦for now. 
2 Likes
Iām gonna start a new gang called the Adepts to offset the bloated corrupt Mavens.
You could be both, I guess, but some of those lardasses would need to step it up.
1 Like
Let me know if you need profile flair for that. I created the āAā at the Adminās request, so maybe you can talk him into something like that for your gang, unless youāre worried about something hiding part of the 
face.
1 Like
Hey, thanks, brother Crease, charter member!
1 Like
You better get a 
, all your 
is trying to escape out the end of the tunnel.
I was a the Vascular Quacks office the other day and got to watch the blood flowing through my arteries and veins on the big screen, interesting.
Hereās a short list of Mavens sorted from most lard to least.
Do I really have to do that? You know who you are.
- quat massa quis enim
- Donec pede justo
- fringilla vel
- vulputate eget
- aliquet nec
- Nullam dictum felis
@Antonius, maybe this one is better? Doppler ultrasound is pretty cool. Flow is generally a good sign as long as things are going where theyāre supposed to go, so Iām glad you were able to see that. Hopefully @TomG has good flow for a speedy recovery with his issue. Yikes.
@peepeep, thanks for accepting me into your gang. 
Since the āAā is already being used for āAdminā, maybe your gang needs a āDā for āaDerptā. Derp!
2 Likes
Nice flow. Iāve know the vascular lady since 1998, she used to work in the ultrasound department and moved up to vascular 20 years ago. She was showing me her new fangled Doppler ultrasound machine. I got a clot in my leg after the repair job to my shattered knee in 1998 and it destroyed the little check valves in the veins that open and close as the blood is headed back up the leg. She showed me the valves on the screen and why they just stay open now so the blood flows back down causing leg swelling. Compression stocking helps with that. The machine was an interesting piece of work.
I should take a 
over to her and have he check out itās pipes on the machine. .
1 Like
Iāve looked worse.