You and me both.When I saw that, I knew that no one, judge jury, bailiffs had any gun savvy at all. I would have yelled "Don't point that thing at me, you idiot!"...
Biased? Maybe. Moron? Maybe.The judge is a biased moron.
![]()
You shall not pinch to zoom: Rittenhouse trial judge disallows basic iPad feature
Judge: iPad pinch-to-zoom could “insert more items” into video of shootings.arstechnica.com
I guess all the tech gurus are wrong and you and the judge are right.Biased? Maybe. Moron? Maybe.
But he's not wrong - the pinch-to-zoom feature does interpolate data.
Which method the algorithm uses (cubic, linear gradient, AI) and how it affects the data would have to be determined by an expert.
ETA: found an AMA where the creator of the forensic video software the prosecution uses weighs in: https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/qsjy9s/_/hkdxpvl
Who created apple's pinch to zoom? That guy? Doubt it. Check your source.So you're going to listen to some tech writers rather than the people who actually create the software used in the trial. Got it.
LOL, that data interpolation is literally how zooming in works is inarguable.Who created apple's pinch to zoom? That guy? Doubt it. Check your source.
The pinch to zoom does adds (or maybe better multiplies) pixel when it zooms. But the judge is still a moron for believing it's done by logarithms.LOL, that data interpolation is literally how zooming in works is inarguable.
Whether or not it should be allowed as evidence is above my pay-grade.
I'm pretty surprised there's apparently no case law wrt this being admissible data at this point. It's a fair point by the defense unless the precise algorithms used are known and fully understood, and it appears this hasn't come up in a trial before.The pinch to zoom does adds (or maybe better multiplies) pixel when it zooms. But the judge is still a moron for believing it's done by logarithms.
The prosecution should have just used MS Paint or something similar to zoom.I'm pretty surprised there's apparently no case law wrt this being admissible data at this point. It's a fair point by the defense unless the precise algorithms used are known and fully understood, and it appears this hasn't come up in a trial before.
They could have just gone down to home depot and bought some paint to alter the image.The prosecution should have just used MS Paint or something similar to zoom.
Does it not interpolate? Honest question, I don't know.The prosecution should have just used MS Paint or something similar to zoom.
No. Open something in MS Paint and zoom down far enough and you'll see the squares.Does it not interpolate? Honest question, I don't know.
If so, then that's the no-brainer answer.
Modern cell phones actually do interpolate, using data from different cameras in the phone to come up with an image superior to digital zoom (cropping) but inferior to optical zoom...No. Open something in MS Paint and zoom down far enough and you'll see the squares.
With Photoshop, it can merge an averaged color from adjacent pixels into a pixel.
I'm guessing it will. They will most likely try him again.What happens if there is a hung jury?
If the jury deadlocks on one charge, the prosecution would have the chance to retry the case only for that charge. The rest of the verdicts would stand as decided.What happens if there is a hung jury?