• hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Don’t know why you’re being downvoted, it’s a good point that shows that genetics is the main factor for your appearance

      • onlinepersona@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe but there is more to the outcome than just genes. Certain ones can be activated of deactivated and that can be done by epigentics for example. Gene expression is a thing.

        The AI would need way more information that just DNA to generate an image of the person.

          • onlinepersona@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            No, they couldn’t, that’s what’s being said. If you have a huge state machine with billions of parameters, toggling a different subset can yield wildly different results.

              • onlinepersona@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                So? That’s nowhere near the same thing as what you’re suggesting “AI can just take DNA and make the same person”. Look up what twins actually are. They aren’t just DNA injected into some random person.

            • hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              12 hours ago

              I just re-read their post and yes you’re right, in which case I disagree with them. “Perfect” is not achievable by any means. Maybe accurate enough to be mistaken as a twin for the real person, but not perfect

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Maybe if you mean things like two eyes, two hands, two feet, one nose, but not in any details

        • T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Same womb, similar growing environment, etc.

          But even then, they’re not perfectly identical. Very similar, but not the exact same.

          • hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            I don’t think root comment was saying the AI would generate perfectly accurate images. I think 90% accuracy is doable, just from DNA

            • BrainBow65@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              If you’re just talking about a strand of DNA with no epigenetic info I think 90% is being very optimistic.