Wen / Sun Wu
Many netizens and technology bloggers jointly opposed him, saying that they had not found the so-called "P map" problem. Wang Yueqi once again posted a clarification, indicating that it is more appropriate to use "AI calculated" to describe. He insists that the P30 Pro can automatically add details, such as a pattern of "underwear" on a picture of the moon.Mobile phoneIt can also handle the effect of "ring pit":
However, public opinion still condemned him one-sidedly.
On the evening of April 16, Peng Lin, founder of Aifei Science and Technology, also said that "shooting the moon mode" did optimize the original map algorithmically, but not to the extent of "P map" as Wang Yueqi said. The latter releases material selectively in the process of shooting verification, which belongs to the unprofessional behavior of "black manufacturer". Therefore, Peng Lin directly announced that Wang Yueqi would be dismissed, and fined himself a month's salary, will love technology video content for a month.
But that's not the end of the story, because the latest findings have been reversed.
Knowing that Huawei has spent three sleepless nights, a detailed evaluation has been carried out to confirm that Huawei does have the function of "P month". This is the ability of "out of nothing". That is to say, besides "restoring" the very blurred picture of the moon, it can also achieve the following: 1. Add in the details of the complete cut-out; 2. Restore the details of flip-over; 3. Eliminate additional miscellaneous items.
Huawei's "P-month" simply means that once AI is identified as the moon, trigger mechanism, it will have the ability to patch the pattern of "out of nothing", which is equivalent to modifying its own answer according to the standard answer.
Even if it looks like a picture of the moon, it can trick AI into triggering "P-Moon" when properly manipulated, such as Pluto and the Master's List:
The master's watch even showed a bright spot in the ring-shaped mountain.
Huawei does have the suspicion of misleading consumers, because Huawei propagandizes its advantages by shooting the moon, but because of "P month", its long focus performance is indeed ahead of friends, but it can not achieve its propaganda effect to consumers by shooting the moon.
In this way, Wang Yueqi is the one who needs to accept an apology. His former opponents did apologize a lot.
But after all, Wang Yueqi was dismissed from the company just because he raised his own query. As to whether he was "convicted for his words", some readers commented, "His behavior has brought a serious negative impact on the reputation of the company. As the owner of a private enterprise, there is a problem in dismissing him according to the articles of association of the company?" Freedom of speech doesn't mean you don't have to pay for your speech.
Although in law, enterprises do not need to show all evidence of dismissal to the outside world, the reasonableness of dismissal needs to be questioned because it has become an event of public opinion.
Article 25 of the Labor Law stipulates that if a worker has one of the following circumstances, the employing unit may terminate the labor contract: (1) it has been proved that it does not meet the conditions for employment during the probation period; (2) it has seriously violated the labor discipline or the rules and regulations of the employing unit; (3) it has seriously neglected its duties and engaged in malpractices for personal gain, which has caused great damage to the interests of the employing unit; (4) it has been relied on. Criminal liability shall be investigated by law.
Article 6 of the Provisions on Evidence in Civil Procedure of the Supreme People's Court stipulates that in cases of labor disputes, the employer shall bear the burden of proof if labor disputes arise because the employer makes decisions such as dismissal, delisting, dismissal, termination of labor contract, reduction of labor remuneration and calculation of the working life of the worker.
In this incident, not to mention that public opinion has reversed, Wang Yueqi was "cleansed of grievances". Since the two main executives of Ai-wei Technology also forwarded his micro-blog, I am afraid it is difficult to prove that his micro-blog itself has "serious violations of labor discipline or rules and regulations of employing units". Of course, he should not be expelled from such a severe punishment.
Does the content of microblog constitute "selective publishing material" to "black manufacturer"? You can judge the content of the original microblog. Since the trigger mechanism can be used to search for evidence of "P month" without triggering, the graph without triggering is meaningless and does not prove any problems, it is also reasonable to use a trigger picture to prove the problem. If the employer is involved in labor arbitration or lawsuit, it is also difficult to prove the evidence here.
Although it has been a hot issue in social media such as Weibo and Zhihu, it has not received due attention in the mainstream media, and few mainstream media have "voiced" about it.
Like the mainstream media, science and technology assessment takes supervision and evaluation as its responsibility (which does not mean that most of the media are really responsible). Reasonable questioning is a positive energy behavior that should be encouraged by the whole society. Even if sometimes the media people make mistakes, the public can tolerate and understand as long as the starting point does not violate the right and wrong.
Encouraging reasonable doubts does not mean relaxing the professional requirements of the media itself, on the contrary, putting forward higher requirements. If the media do not improve their professional abilities, they will face the possibility of being "smacked" in the Internet age at any time. This is a mechanism of mutual checks and balances, which is the equivalence between questioning power and investigating due diligence.
As a media person, I want to speak for Wang Yueqi in real name. "Freedom of speech" has boundaries. This year, an assistant professor at Duke University was dismissed because he advised students not to speak Chinese. But this kind of boundary must be the basic consensus that the whole society has already reached. Living in different countries should also adapt to the tolerance of different societies to various problems. In any case, a person who takes evaluation as his profession may be a little rash, but based on his own experiments, he questioned a certain shooting function of a mobile phone. He did not break through this boundary, nor should he bear such serious consequences.
Nor should mainstream media and Huawei officials remain silent. Previously, 996. ICU cases have proved that the whole society pays great attention to the rights and interests of workers, so the opinion of the mainstream media should not be absent in this "expulsion". The case of Benz women owners'rights and interests shows that consumer rights and interests can not be ignored. In the case that the performance of P30 Pro long focus is obviously better than that of friends, Huawei officials should not return the misleading suspected monthly propaganda. Avoid it?