“Apple’s iPad creates what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there”

This is a shit article by a lazy reporter who doesn't understand the rules of evidence in criminal trials. The judge is simply applying precedent here. Digital zoom does involve some manipulation of the original image. That manipulation is probably fine, but if the prosecution wants to introduce that evidence then they need to also provide an expert witness who can testify to that effect. If the prosecution failed to do so then they're incompetent and failed to do the necessary trial preparation.

This is an insidious argument because there's a grain of truth in it. Photos/videos are heavily post-processed by Apples 'Neural engine' (https://github.com/hollance/neural-engine) running on the Bionic chips, but this is done at the time of recording.

Zooming the video to play it to the jury would just be simple linear scaling, and could be done on any device capable of playing & scaling a video. For example, the zoom or crop functions in VLC.

> have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three-dimensions and logarithms

a dangerous mix of incoherent buzzwords that's nearly correct.

“Apple’s logarithms” faking footage is about the most crackpot thing I’ve heard all week. The fact a judge let this pass is incredible.

this case is actually pretty interesting, since there are definitely more and more black box algorithms running on photo taking apps to enhance them.

We globally know what they're doing but i remember very fondly a CS teacher in the 90s telling us how military refused to use anything based on neural nets because results were unprovables.

True: For image CAPTURE on portable devices a lot of ML-based image processing is done.

Unknown but unlikely: video PLAYBACK on iPad to use AI upscaling. A Google search does not provide a definitive answer to this, but in all likelihood linear upscaling is used. AI-based upscaling does exist though, look at the many plugins for MPV for instance. Surely, if Apple has implemented this in Quicktime video player it would be all over their marketing.

How in the world did a judge actually allow this argument to go forward? This is malpractice.

Computer, "ENHANCE!"

Sigh.

Actual title: Judge buys Rittenhouse lawyer’s inane argument that Apple’s pinch-to-zoom manipulates footage