I agree with everything you state about squeezing data out of sensors.
But, I also run into a LOT of cases where I need better sensors too. I just don't see them as mutually exclusive.
I did stick my comment into an LLM, annoying, I hand wrote the entire comment, and had it fact check my statements. Here is my original unmodified comment:
Eh, there's too much here for me to give a proper reply.
I agree with a lot of what you said, and I'm on team sensor, but I've been studying how the eye works and processes info.
A *system* of many sensors can cover larger ground for sure... But I'm very interested in compact systems that can be better than the eye or ear, I know we can do it, I just haven't seen it yet.
Also, AI and/or filtering can't give you data that wasn't picked up by the sensor in the first place.
There are limits in the sensor, and there are also limits in getting the data off the sensor. That's true for biology and hardware.
I'm pretty excited to get my hands of Quantum Dot cameras for example, but even they don't have the same Dynamic Range as the human eye, but could probably beat it with clever systems engineering.
But, I also run into a LOT of cases where I need better sensors too. I just don't see them as mutually exclusive.
I did stick my comment into an LLM, annoying, I hand wrote the entire comment, and had it fact check my statements. Here is my original unmodified comment: