Going for a hike, seeing a nice plant and saying: I wonder what this plant is. And most of the time getting a correct answer.
If people is stupid enough to eat wild things based on any kind of unprofessional identification it may be just proving that Darwin was onto something.
I have use it a lot while hiking and mostly got correct results for tree or small planta identification to satisfy my curiosity. Good enough for me. I’m not calling the National Center for Botanics neither hiring a professional botanic for 2000€/hour just to satisfy my curiosity while hiking.
It has its use cases. I would trust it as much as those old plant books for amateurs I used to have. I would also got incorrect identifications out of those due my lack of expertise, more so that with the AI I use nowadays.
Not so sure what is so cool about “regularly wrong and dangerous”.
Going for a hike, seeing a nice plant and saying: I wonder what this plant is. And most of the time getting a correct answer.
If people is stupid enough to eat wild things based on any kind of unprofessional identification it may be just proving that Darwin was onto something.
Right, so when you need an ID but don’t really care about whether it’s correct, AI is great I guess. Not sure what the point is though.
But if you actually want a proper ID, I’d stay far away from AI and go to community with experts.
I have use it a lot while hiking and mostly got correct results for tree or small planta identification to satisfy my curiosity. Good enough for me. I’m not calling the National Center for Botanics neither hiring a professional botanic for 2000€/hour just to satisfy my curiosity while hiking.
It has its use cases. I would trust it as much as those old plant books for amateurs I used to have. I would also got incorrect identifications out of those due my lack of expertise, more so that with the AI I use nowadays.
Obsidentify is usually quite good though, and has their results checked by humans