• nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Is this on purpose?

        The shooter is on screen the victim is not.

        This is on purpose isn’t it. You’re fucking with me.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          This is on purpose isn’t it. You’re fucking with me.

          Sorry, I thought you were saying that the guy walking by was off screen, and the person on screen was shot, since the focus of the conversation was about binary search based on what’s on the video.

          Guy walks bye and shoots someone well offscreen.

          In that case the shooter, walking up and then holding up a gun and pulling the trigger would be the marker, as well as the puff of smoke, for the binary search, which could be done with AI, if not human eyes.

          Also they would know the approximate time of death, so they can use that to extrapolate a range on the video that they need to binary search on. I’m pretty sure this is normal police work that I’m describing at this point.

          Having said that, that’s one hell of a hypothetical you made there. At some point you could definitely come up with an example of when a binary search wouldn’t work, but not based on what the OP was discussing, or what others were discussing about two people having a fight on camera.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            If you skip to after the smoke has dissipated, you cannot gather enough information to know that you need to rewind. A binary search is useless in this scenario.

                • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  If it’s not “for the duration of the rest of the video,” then binary search would be useless

                  That’s not true. It only has to be long enough to be detectable, by landing on a strip of video that it exists on. It’ll be harder, definately, but still doable.

                  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Maybe I have no understanding of what a binary search is. My understanding is that you check halfway through the video, see if the thing has happened yet, then skip halfway to the end if it hasn’t. Check again, skip again. When you see the cue that the event has happened, you rewind to halfway between the latest point where the event hadn’t happened yet and the earliest point when it has. Keep doing that and you can pinpoint the exact frame where the event happens in a matter of minutes.

                    Binary search would be largely useless in cases where you have a good chance of skipping right past the event. If the video is an hour long, and the event happens 34 minutes in and leaves a visual cue that lasts less than 11 minutes, then binary search does not find the event. At that point, watching the video fast forwarded would be the way to go, and that’s not a binary search, that’s just watching the video.

                    So I should correct myself: the visual cue doesn’t have to last the remainder of the video, it just needs to last until one of the points that you check. Which still makes it not useful for things that don’t leave visual cues that last more than a few minutes, because it cannot find most of those events if they happen at a random time in an hour+ video.