Because it is clearly messing with more than just “lighting”. While the spatial models appear untouched, it heavily changes textures, inventing details that simply were not there before, no matter what lighting. And then some of that “lighting” is also used to imply spacial details that were not there before.

All of that creates that incredibly artificial and sloppy overall impression at “100%”. At lower percentages it likeky won’t be better, the sloppiness will be merely more diluted and therefore more tolerable.

Cornell Unversity owns ArXiv.org, that doesn’t mean they have much to do with the content of that article, as they clearly state that ArXiv.org is not peer-reviewing articles hosted there.

Not quoting the primary source does not per chance have anything to do with the source being a not peer reviewed archive of the Cornell University, does it? I wonder, is that normal in the field of AI research?

They might think that they are upholding open source secure communication but what they are really achieving with it is fortifying the US big tech duopoly. There are other aims than theirs, of maximum security, in the EU we are facing the real and very relevant issue of digital sovereignty, which is separate from the ambition for getting hardened mobile systems. Sure, possibly legislation would be preferable to regulate and open up what Google’s Play Integrity API is doing, but as long as that legislation does not exist, creating alternative systems is crucial.

I can’t shake the feeling that this isn’t really about the UA but the private feud of Graphene OS developers with pretty much every single other alternative OS or degoogled android. Yes, they are all less secure than Graphene OS, primarily because Graphene OS relies on huge man power effort by Google to keep the firmware at the cutting edge with swift security updates. That is all good and fine, for their cause but it is not the only legitimate cause out there.

The war over civil rights is continuing, no questions but this has been an important vote against the surveillance state ambitions.