You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
7 points
*

I agree with you, but disagree with your reasoning.

If you take 1lb of potatoes, boil and mash them with no other add-ins, you can reasonably estimate the nutritional information through visual inspection alone, assuming you have enough reference to see there is about a pound of potatoes. There are many nutrition apps out there that utilize this, and it’s essentially just lopping off the extremes and averaging out the rest.

The problem with this is, it’s impossible to accurately guess the recipe, and therefore the ingredients. Take the aforementioned mashed potatoes. You can’t accurately tell what variety of potato was used. Was water added back during the mashing? Butter? Cream cheese? Cheddar? Sour cream? There’s no way to tell visually, assuming uniform mashing, what is in the potatoes.

Not to mention, the pin sees two pieces of bread on top of each other… what is in the bread? Who the fuck knows!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It isn’t as magical (or accurate) as it looks. It’s just an extension of how various health tracking apps track food intake. There’s usually just one standard entry in the database for mashed potatoes based on whatever their data source thinks a reasonable default value should be. It doesn’t know if what you’re eating is mostly butter and cheese.

How useful a vague and not particularly accurate nutrition profile really can be is an open question, but it seems to be a popular feature for smartwatches.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I see what you mean, and while you raise a few excellent points, you seem to forget that a human looking at mashed potatoes have far more data than a computer lookkng at an image.

A human get data about smell, temperature texture and weight in addition to a simple visual impression.

This is why I picked a book/letter example, I wanted to reduce the variables available to a human to get closer to what a computer has from a photo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

It needn’t be exact. A ballpark calorie/sugar that’s 90% accurate would be sufficient. There’s some research that suggests that’s possible: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.01082.pdf

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

But what use would it be then, you wouldn’t be able to compare one potato to another, both would register the same values.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You are correct but you are speaking for yourself and not for example the disabled community who may lack senses or the capacity to calculate a result. While ai still improves its capabilities they are the first to benefit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I get what you are saying, but this specific decive had no future.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 505K

    Comments