← Back to context

Comment by datameta

6 months ago

Computer vision totally qualifies as AI as it can grant an agent artificially intelligent behavior.

The fuck it does.

for it to be AI, it needs some sort of ML basis. otherwise its just fancy "classical" computer vision.

(this is from someone who's been working in the field for far too long, and remembers a time before "deep", "ML" and "ai" were part of every paper. )

Based on what is said in the article, it seems like a VERY simple algorithm. It clusters the pixels in the image by color and reports any small blobs of unusual color. That's not AI by any of the stupid definitions we've come up with recently.

  • Clustering and outlier detection is not AI?

    • To me the fundamental difference is that AI is trained, algorithms are not. There's not training here, it's a simple frequency count looking for outliers. While it's an approach a human would take the human is doing it in a very different fashion. And the human is much more sensitive to form, this is much more sensitive to color.

      They are definitely right that our (I am a hiker) gear tends to stand out against nature. Not only is it generally in colors that do not appear in any volume in nature, but almost nothing in the plant and mineral kingdoms is of uniform color. A blob of uniform color is in all probability either a monochromatic animal (the sheep their system detects) or man made.

      What surprises me about this is that it hasn't been tried before.

      5 replies →

    • Novel stuff is AI, old stuff is statistics. Decision trees used to be called AI :)

    • I mean, if something as traditional as simple clustering is AI, then so is linear regression and Excel Sheets have been doing AI/ML for the past 2 decades.

      At some point we just have to stop with the breathless hype. I'm sure labelling it as AI gets more clicks and exposure so I know exactly why they do it. Still, it's annoying.

      8 replies →