this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
1431 points (97.4% liked)

Greentext

4616 readers
2287 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If it literally got thrown out the window, a jpeg could not be recognizable as the original.

if it was literally thrown out the window, we would be talking semantics and philosophy. Moot point anyway. Your proposal was that the pixel be identical to the pixel on the previous photo. You can make an image using a bunch of pennies in varying states of oxidation that resemble an image. You cant spit an image into an ASCII converter, and it will resemble that image. Those are quite literally not the same picture. Your proposal defined a provable system, to demonstrate that the images were identical. I said they were objectively not because they are not. Image compression also isn't explicitly blurring. But again moot point.

My point there was demonstrating that your approach to defining quality was bad.

I already said it is a trade off of size vs appearance. You are setting up a strawman of “what if we had two cameras that made almost identical photos”

it's more complicated than size vs appearance, but generally. Size vs quality, is how lossy compression is considered. HW accel av1 and software av1 are going to look and output vastly different media, at different sizes. They work differently, even though they use the same underlying codec. My point is that nothing is an objective binary state.

Again, no. This is about taking a photo. The process of taking a photo is the same in my current 3 camera phone as your single camera phone. Your claim that it adds complication to the user is false.

Yeah, if we obfuscate it down to ignore everything else, it's fully transparent. Much like cigarettes are good for you because they make you feel normal. Dont worry about the lung cancer stuff it's normal and happens to everybody.

What are you talking about? Where did I mention percentages before?

do you not understand the concept of an analogy? Or even the concept of drastically simplifying concepts in a way that can be easily explained and translated between individuals without having complete and total understanding between those two individuals? it'd be weird since that's explicitly what you're doing. That statement is explaining my point of view, and explaining your arguments in turn. It should be fairly obvious why i just don't care.

The Pixel 7pro camera is obviously better than my Pixel 3a

the pixel 7 pro was released sometime in october in 2022. The 3a was released in august of 2020. That's 2 years between the models. Not to mention the obvious model disparity between the 3a and the 7 pro, the 7 pro being $900 and the 3a appearing to be $400, they are objectively not in the same class of phone, nor are they even in the same time period. The majority of difference in camera quality is going to be down to the sensors themselves improving, rather than having more cameras.

??? There is no significant difference between a Pixel 8 and an iPhone 15. They both have 2 camera modules on the back.

yeah, because any two phones today, one produced with one camera, and one produced with three, are going to take pretty similar photos. It has nothing to do with the amount of cameras, it has everything to do with the amount of capability between the two. If you think back, you'll remember my point about percentages, which seemed to have confused you. This is a literal product based interpretation of that statement. Which also seems to have gone over your head.

You said you didn’t see the need for more camera lenses. A Pixel 8 pro can take noticeably better photos than your current iPhone 5 because of the additional lenses.

this is actually just wrong. The iphone 5, released in 2012. the pixel 8 pro seems to have released sometime in 2023. More than a decade apart. It takes better photos because the camera is just better. The sensor is significantly bigger, the bump well, exists now. All qualities that lead to a better camera quality. The pixel 8 pro with one camera, or three cameras, is going to take the same kind of photo regardless of what i do with it. It does have an ultrawide, of which i genuinely have no idea what i would use for. And a telephoto, which has some obvious uses. but nothing that i care about. The instances in which i would use those cameras, are still going to look bad.

It only seems convoluted to you because you haven’t used it. You think it must be complicated in the same way someone would think having multiple cores in their phone cpu would be convoluted and hard to use.

if we're bringing the concept of multi core cpus in again, then i can actually hit you with some knowledge truths on this one. Multi core cpus are significantly more convoluted to handle from an OS perspective. This is why they didn't exist for the longest time. Instead of everything running sequentially on one core, there are multiple, some of them are even "phantom" cores, that only exist when the main core is busy. Which means you need to figure out a way to divide cpu time, across cores, presumably evenly because that would be the most effective manner of doing it. While also not incurring significant overhead costs, such as latency, and even cpu cycles. Because if your queue handling is bad, you might as well just have a single core. Especially if you can block up the queue, and crawl the system to a halt.

Yet another little fun fact btw. This is true for all processors, but especially so on multi core processors, to my knowledge single core processors just tended to function a little bit differently (prior to modern multi core architectures) to ensure this wasn't a problem (hardware interrupts) But on multi core cpus you need a way to ensure that a piece of software accessing the cpu can't hog the entire cpu, blocking out the OS that's managing it, and it's scheduler as well, this would cause a dead lock. Which means you wouldn't be able to do anything. Even if the end user experience is transparent, it's still more convoluted, shitting on the carpet and sweeping it under the rug doesn't remove the fact that you shit on the carpet. Unless we're arguing that convolution doesn't exist, im not sure how else it would work. Convolution incurs costs, and costs incur many things.

i could very well argue that you must think cpus are simple because you don't understand them. An objective truth of design and philosophy, is anything that adds more complexity, makes it more convoluted. There is no way around this.

The iPhone 5 is so old there aren’t going to be direct comparisons.

even then it wouldn't be accurate, the iphone 5 is 12 years old now. The iphone 6 would be a better argument, though still not a good one. Ironically enough, dankpods recently did a video where he compared an iphone 15 and an iphone 5c. The 15 was better, but both were still bad.

Can I argue that a 10 year old Intel PC is no faster than a current high end AMD PC because there are no websites that directly compare 10 year old PCs to current PCs?

there are websites for that, so you couldn't argue that anyway. Though again moot point.

You don’t care but other do. It doesn’t have anything to do with modern phone culture.

because i guess taking photos was never a part of phone culture. That was just something people did randomly for no reason, and by accident. I dont integrate with the modern culture, which is why i detest it so much. A lot of people, you included don't mind it, and have opinions on it. A lot of people, me included, can't stand it because i don't want to spend exorbitant prices on what is more than required.

[–] Blue_Morpho 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My point there was demonstrating that your approach to defining quality was bad.

You keep trying to claim that quality difference is subjective. If that is your point then the JPEG quality option does nothing. Quality 1 is the same as Quality 99 because the pixels change. It is a false claim. You can objectively measure the difference from the original. Again this isn't discussing two images that are so similar that the differences are subjective such as two different encoders both at Quality 99.

I am going to repeat this again because you keep ignoring it. I AM NOT DISCUSSING TWO IMAGES WHERE THE IMAGE IS SO SIMLAR THAT QUALITY BECOMES SUBJECTIVE.

do you not understand the concept of an analogy?

You said this, "your claim is that 99% efficacy is worse than 100% efficacy," after I had already said:

"I AM NOT DISCUSSING TWO IMAGES WHERE THE IMAGE IS SO SIMLAR THAT QUALITY BECOMES SUBJECTIVE."

Yeah, if we obfuscate it down to ignore everything else, it’s fully transparent

There is no difference in the UI. It isn't obfuscation but presenting a complex task as simple to the user. Just like all modern technology. You don't have to know how the OS multitasks to post your replies.

if we’re bringing the concept of multi core cpus in again, t

Stop with the chatGPT crap. I was writing a VxD driver for Windows 3.1 32 years ago.

i could very well argue that you must think cpus are simple because you don’t understand them.

When typing your reply, what did you have to do to control your multiple CPU's so that you could type and post your reply. Did you have to set the affinity of the browser process to a particular core? Did you manually schedule the threads? No? I thought so.

there are websites for that, so you couldn’t argue that anyway.

Show me a website that compares a computer from when the iphone 5 came out directly to a computer today. Yes there are benchmarks archived of PC's from 2012 which can be compared to benchmarks in 2023. But no one has reviewed them side by side today. If you just want static numbers for an iPhone 5 there's DXOMark and GSMArena.com.

So that's your claim? An iPhone 5's camera is as good as any camera unless someone has done a review with a direct comparison? It must be as good as a Canon EOS R6 Mark II because no one has tested them side by side? Really? When you do video editing work, was the source all recorded nothing better than iPhone 5 because its all the same?

because i guess taking photos was never a part of phone culture.

The first mass marketed camera was a produced by Alphonse Giroux in 1839. Although everyone didn't have a camera until the release of the Kodak brownie in 1900. It has nothing to do with the phone. Adding the camera to the phone made it possible to not have to buy and carry a separate device to do what everyone had been doing for over 100 years.

I dont integrate with the modern culture

You use a desktop computer and do video editing! It's the phone camera users who are traditional.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

You keep trying to claim that quality difference is subjective.

i'm claiming that it's both objective, and subjective and that in this case, for me, it's primarily subjective, rather than objective, based on my usage.

You said this

you asked me where the percentages came from, i explained it.

There is no difference in the UI. It isn’t obfuscation but presenting a complex task as simple to the user.

or what you could quite literally argue is, the definition of obfuscation, though in this case i probably meant abstraction. They're basically the same tbh.

Stop with the chatGPT crap. I was writing a VxD driver for Windows 3.1 32 years ago.

it's not chatgpt, also good to know you wrote insert device drivers for windows.

When typing your reply, what did you have to do to control your multiple CPU’s so that you could type and post your reply. Did you have to set the affinity of the browser process to a particular core? Did you manually schedule the threads? No? I thought so.

no, but my system did, having a cursory understanding of this stuff and how it works allows you to better utilize your hardware.

Show me a website

cpubenchmark and basically every other synthetic benchmark tool out there. cpus are a bundle of transistors, it's not hard to bench them (though it's not that simple either) phone cameras are a little more involved. You can't really just go "bigger number more better"

So that’s your claim? An iPhone 5’s camera is as good as any camera unless someone has done a review with a direct comparison?

i literally have like two paragraphs explaining my thoughts. Not sure why you even put that in there.

Adding the camera to the phone made it possible to not have to buy and carry a separate device to do what everyone had been doing for over 100 years.

amusingly, not my claim at all, the first phone that released, which really did numbers, had a camera on it. Every phone since then has had a camera. Although i should probably mention contextually here, that i am SPECIFICALLY referring to touch screen phones, the modern ones, which really invented the whole philosophy of modern phone culture, the thing that i was specifically referring to in my previous comment. Since we already established that lack of context is bad and what not.

You use a desktop computer and do video editing! It’s the phone camera users who are traditional.

cool, still not a normie though. Unfortunately.