Kyle Rittenhouse defense claims Apple's 'AI' manipulates footage when using pinch-to-zoom

midian182

Posts: 7,786   +80
Staff member
A hot potato: The defense attorney for Kyle Rittenhouse has claimed that Apple uses "artificial intelligence" to manipulate footage when users pinch-to-zoom on iPads. The judge in the trial said it was up to the prosecution to prove this is untrue.

Rittenhouse is currently on trial for shooting and killing two demonstrators and injuring a third in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25 last year. He has been charged with homicide, attempted homicide, and reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. Rittenhouse and his lawyers argue he acted in self-defense.

In a cross-examination yesterday, Rittenhouse's lawyer, Mark Richards, objected to assistant district attorney Thomas Binger's plan to present footage showing the teen shooting Joseph Rosenbaum. The reason? Binger was going to use the iPad's pinch-to-zoom feature.

"iPads, which are made by Apple, have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three dimensions and logarithms," Richards said, also showing he doesn't know the difference between logarithms and algorithms. "And it uses artificial intelligence, or their logarithms, to create what they believe is happening. So this isn't actually enhanced video; this is Apple's iPad programming creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there."

Binger responded by noting that pretty much everyone understands what pinch-to-zoom entails and that the feature doesn't alter the image in the way Richards alleged.

Judge Schroeder said that it would be “high risk” to show the video in court without first disproving the claims from the defense. Therefore, the onus was on the prosecution to prove that Apple doesn't manipulate images when pinch-to-zoom is used. He also dismissed comparisons between pinch-to-zoom and using a magnifying glass. “I don’t believe that,” the judge said.

Judge Schroeder demanded the prosecution bring in an expert to testify but didn't allow them to adjourn to find someone before Rittenhouse was cross-examined. The judge also suggested prosecutors find an expert during a 20-minute recess, but it appears nobody could be found or get to the trial in that time.

The jury eventually watched footage of the incident on a Windows device connected to a large TV. There was no zooming, and the images didn't fill the entire screen.

Permalink to story.

 

George Keech

Posts: 148   +237
When I read Logarithm, I genuinely thought - I imagine most computer devices use them in some calculations or other?

What an absolute spoon
 

kimo1

Posts: 243   +450
Meanwhile, in another dimension:
“It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him, with your gun – now your hand’s down, pointed at him – that he fired, right?” defense lawyer Corey Chirafisi asked witness Gaige Grosskreutz. To which he replied: “Correct.”
 

Irata

Posts: 2,044   +3,475
‚Demonstrators‘ afair, the shooting took place at around Midnight and this is what Wikipedia has to say about the Kenosha unrests:

The demonstrations were marked by daily peaceful protesting followed by confrontations with law enforcement and rioting and arson at night.

I am not saying this to justify anyone shooting anyone else - the courts are there to determine what kind of shooting it was, hopefully in a proper manner.

But: using the term demonstrator for participants in a riot is imho misleading as that creates a picture of the defendant showing up to a peaceful demonstration with an assault rifle blasting at demonstrators holding signs and flowers.

Personally, I think the kid should not have been there period - armed or unarmed. It wasn‘t even his town / store.
 

Angga B

Posts: 166   +138
Personally, I think the kid should not have been there period - armed or unarmed. It wasn‘t even his town / store.
Either he shouldn't be there OR there are law enforcers there, enforcing the law.
It's a direct causation. You see it everywhere in this planet. Absent of law/authority, everyone end up kill every other ones.
Police is product of civililzation. Everywhere. Not only in "raycist american". But of course, most americans only know that the world ends on their west and east coast. So...
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,096   +4,003
If you look at the situation and the judge history at all you should all know that regardless of the tech idiocy in display here (as in, with or without) the kid's walking out free.

The point isn't justice, the point is to send a message that extra judicial killings of enemies of the State it's totally ok just maybe don't get caught if you're not a cop.
 

JamesBlond

Posts: 171   +120
Either he shouldn't be there OR there are law enforcers there, enforcing the law.
It's a direct causation. You see it everywhere in this planet. Absent of law/authority, everyone end up kill every other ones.
Police is product of civililzation. Everywhere. Not only in "raycist american". But of course, most americans only know that the world ends on their west and east coast. So...
Only a racist thinks the whole of the USA is racist.... maybe 5% max of the USA and the rest of the world are racist, but until you can stop free will you will never have a world without it, because some people cant understand how others can be stupid and stay that way even with an education
 

Uncle Al

Posts: 8,675   +7,585
You know, just on the circumstances that he "owned" the gun illegally, he transported it across state lines, he carried it illegally in public should get him 20 years .... and as for self defense, if he didn't have the gun, there would not have been a confrontation. Here is an excellent case where he should get life without parole and put into general population ..... then we'll see him really cry!
 

Ben1978

Posts: 146   +105
You know, just on the circumstances that he "owned" the gun illegally, he transported it across state lines, he carried it illegally in public should get him 20 years .... and as for self defense, if he didn't have the gun, there would not have been a confrontation. Here is an excellent case where he should get life without parole and put into general population ..... then we'll see him really cry!
I'm unclear on the exact details of the case, but the argument seems to be with gun advocates that if someone is attacking you they might try and take your gun and use it on you, so you better stop them taking your gun by shooting it. But what's the likelihood of being beaten to death in this attack, vs killing someone with the gun you're only firing because you believe they will attack you? To me, any society that lets people own ar-15 assault rifles and walk around with them in public is going to have problems like this continually. Take the guns away and one problem at least will be dealt a fatal blow.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,494   +6,300
I'm unclear on the exact details of the case, but the argument seems to be with gun advocates that if someone is attacking you they might try and take your gun and use it on you, so you better stop them taking your gun by shooting it. But what's the likelihood of being beaten to death in this attack, vs killing someone with the gun you're only firing because you believe they will attack you? To me, any society that lets people own ar-15 assault rifles and walk around with them in public is going to have problems like this continually. Take the guns away and one problem at least will be dealt a fatal blow.
As I see it, I think you, and @Uncle Al, have hit the nail firmly on the head. Gun advocates in the US seem to think that the US constitution gives them the right to own and possess guns freely without any restrictions. I'm not a lawyer, much less a Constitutional lawyer, but I think any reasonable reading of the US constitution, given when it was written, would have to conclude that the only reason that any kind of "gun rights" was included in the constitution was because it was intended, in the absence of something like the US Military (Army, Navy, etc.) as a defense for the United States against attempts to take over the US.

Personally, I think the kid should not have been there period - armed or unarmed. It wasn‘t even his town / store.
And he was not legally deputized to enforce the law. As I see it, he is/was a product of a society that essentially mandates that people do something selfless to prove their worth to society. Unfortunately, I think his choice in this matter was far from wise.

Rittenhouse admitted he was not legally allowed to own the gun, and without his possession of the gun, I bet he would not have been emboldened to be there at all, and the killings HE committed would not have happened.

Again, I am not a lawyer, however, I think this judge just made a grave mistake by accepting the argument by the defense that the AI/pinch-imaging algorithms manipulate the image by adding/removing things that are not there, forcing the prosecution to prove that is not the case, and giving no time for the prosecution to prepare an argument in their favor. If Rittenhouse is found innocent, the prosecution will have an ideal opportunity for appeal because of this issue alone. As those who investigate specious claims in other fields know, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The judge simply took the opinion of the defense as proof of what they claimed without any actual evidence of the AI/Algorithms showing things not there in any case whatsoever. :facepalm:
Assuming the algorithms are implemented correctly, they follow the same principles of similar image enhancement algorithms, and similar algorithms have been implemented based on sound and proven theory to not add things that are not there.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,419
This case is tainted, Trump supporters want him to go free and Biden supporters want him convicted. I just hope that the correct justice is applied. I’m no lawyer nor a witness and I along with most people commenting here does not know better than the judge and the lawyers involved.

One thing to note that if this is ruled as a mistrial by prejudice. That does mean that Biden supporters abused a child for their political agenda.
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 793   +1,385
I don't get it, CSI Miami always had crisp and clear images that they could zoom in on them 1000%. I don't see why pinching and zooming in would matter.

CSI Miami would always catch a killer's reflection in a TV screen that's 20ft away and the killer's blurry face appears to be the size of a thumbnail image.....super zoom in and BAM! Crystal, clear, picture perfect image of the killer. Case closed.

mL0jNTC.gif

tNFtLsX.gif

UYxA0lH.gif
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,494   +6,300
One thing to note that if this is ruled as a mistrial by prejudice. That does mean that Biden supporters abused a child for their political agenda.
I don't think that is an conclusion that can be drawn. Why the prosecutor questioned the way he did is only known to him. I think its unfortunate that most people see this as a political issue. As I see it, the question is that as a US Citizen, was Rittenhouse acting with in the laws of the land?