...or know what Ruth Ginsburg Bader has anything to do with it all.
The RGB color model and representation of images in it is already technical. Anyone who knows what it means also wouldn't need to be told the following quip:
>Also note that computers see things as multi-dimensional tables of data. They don't look at a "picture" - they see 3 spreadsheets of numbers representing the RGB values of the picture.
...which is the only time RGB is mentioned in the article.
That's before we get to the part that "multidimensional" here is extraneous, and doesn't even match the typical usage (where RGBA is stored as a single 32-bit value). Everything is a tape of 1's and 0's, "multidimensionality" comes from interpretation of data.
The dimension of image data is still 2: each pixel is a sample a 2D projection of a 3D world, and is related to other pixels in a way that's different than, say, those of letters in a line of text, or voxels (letters don't have a a well-defined "up" neighbor, voxels have more well-defined neighbors than pixels do).
The RGB color model and representation of images in it is already technical. Anyone who knows what it means also wouldn't need to be told the following quip:
>Also note that computers see things as multi-dimensional tables of data. They don't look at a "picture" - they see 3 spreadsheets of numbers representing the RGB values of the picture.
...which is the only time RGB is mentioned in the article.
That's before we get to the part that "multidimensional" here is extraneous, and doesn't even match the typical usage (where RGBA is stored as a single 32-bit value). Everything is a tape of 1's and 0's, "multidimensionality" comes from interpretation of data.
The dimension of image data is still 2: each pixel is a sample a 2D projection of a 3D world, and is related to other pixels in a way that's different than, say, those of letters in a line of text, or voxels (letters don't have a a well-defined "up" neighbor, voxels have more well-defined neighbors than pixels do).