Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not sure you got my point. There is no non-stylistic interpretation, though I used the more technical term "biased" in the machine learning sense of the term. There isn't even one mathematically. Even RAW is inherently biased by the nature of the CCDs. Even what you physically see is fundamentally biased by the nature of the human visual system, which makes an amazing variety of choices for you long before it reaches your conscious mind. I don't sweat the fact that I'm not getting something that absolutely can not exist.

Your point is meaningless, because there is no way to choose a system such that it isn't affected by your point.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: