I need help to read a blur QR code

Hello, I would like to know how could I make readable this blurred QR code. Thanks for your answers :)

Other urls found in this thread:

nonfree.pizza/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Hello, I would like to know how could I reverse entropy. Thanks for your answers :)

you don't, but I just did and it was really fun to read. Felt good to scan it for no purpose while knowing that you aren't going to. Have a nice day

Install Gimp.
Apply effect: Sharpen.

It works just like you see in CSI.

Hello, I would like to know how could I put the water back into this glass that broke. Thanks for your answers :)

It worked.

here you go OP, i used photoshop content aware reverse image loopback reverse proxy imagizer plugin

wtf i scanned this and now my entire pc is filled with dolphin porn

snide remarks aside, I feel like OPs image has just about enough information left for a successful reconstruction (at least partial).

isnt there some gimp wizz around? Im curious now

No, it's literally impossible.
The edges are blured together so you simply can't make out the individual shapes anymore.

Braincancer, the qr code.

I thought it was a fun read. might talk to my gf what she thinks of the idea

Mardock Scramble is hardly the worst anime that you watch.

The only thing I use qrs for anymore is Animal Crossing New Leaf

it's too far gone, at best you could try manually guessing where the black pixels are, but you'll struggle to get enough correct for a successful decode

What you are looking for is deconvolution. It is practically impossible to do without further knowledge of the kernel, i.e. the exact way the image is blurred. There are iterative methods for blind deconvolution, this looks like the result of such a process If it's really, really important, I'd say you can try to estimate the kernel by exploiting that you know what the three squares look like. This is pretty difficult though and would require some sort of monte carlo approach.

Anyway, not worth the hassle.

One of the key deterrents of successful deconvo is image noise, if the image was completely clean, then I might've even tried it, but the intense noise and artifacts make it impossible.

Hello, I would like to know how could I have my body back? I'm all bones. Thanks for your answers :)

Hello, I was able to partially reconstruct it. How you like the result?

I would like to hear this with sound

nonfree.pizza/

Is anyone else turned on by this?

>(wailing baby sounds)

What does NTR sound like?

Possible with machine learning.
Information is never lost. This has nothing to do with entropy.

You have no idea what youre talking about, do you?

>Information is never lost.

>le machine learning can do everything meme

epic

What the fuck is happening there?

Ballet you uncultured swine.

It literally isn't. You can delete a file, but it won't be deleted for what the universe concerns.

>but it won't be deleted for what the universe concerns.
Pretentious philosophical horseshit has no place in technical discussions.

It's actually science. You know that, because otherwise you wouldn't be trolling.

>Information is never lost.

Blurring removes information.

Give it back, Jamal.

Explain it then.

This.

Especially when it's wrong.

note how /sci/ is actually helpful instead of cynical and dismissive.

I for one still think a (partial) reconstruction should be somehow possible, given that we roughly know what the end result should look like

Partial reconstruction is pointless since you won't be able to access the stored information.
You could maybe recreate about 10 to 15% but the rest would be a complete guessing game.

>philosophical
It's physics.

Thread is full of tech illiterates and people who slept turning physics class.

Scale it down so that each square becomes 1px or 2px in size, then scale back up with interpolation off.
Ymmv

Explains it then faggot.

DOITFAGGOT! Think you're some kind of fucking genius. You're not shit.

It just shuffles it around a little.
Knowing the algorithm that blurred it, would make it easily reversible

No, it is pretentious bitter philosophical bullshit spewed forth by a person who resembles this , but with less dexterity ( hence the bitterness).

It's fucking pretentious horse shit. You've failed to elaborate despite being asked to three times.

>samefagging this hard because you failed physics class
Now that's pretentious pathetic bullshit

I'm not even the guy who said it

Yes you are. Now elaborate or shut the fuck up with your pseudo-intellectual horse shit.

>Yes you are.
Proof? I only posted I didn't post or Also thanks for acknowledging samefagging, proves my point of you being a pathetic retard

>Proof? I only posted
Exactly. If you're such a fucking expert, elaborate on it or shut the fuck up.

Neo-Sup Forums everybody.
Full of people who don't even know simple things like information is indestructible.

Guess what? Fuck off retard. Not going to help educate you because you yourself have been too lazy to do it.

>Not going to help educate you because you yourself have been too lazy to do it.
Because you can't. You're full of shit. You're a pseudo-intellectual pretentious fuck

Thanks for the (You).
You do realize you're being the retarded one here? You're not hurting me being dumb, only making a laughing stock out of yourself posting that.

Why is it when people are asked to back up what they say, they refuse? And usually regurgitate the same shit about "google it".

If you're going to claim something, be prepared to defend it. Otherwise say nothing.

>still baiting
the only thing that baffles me is that anyone is responding to you
no (you) for you btw

Stop deflecting. Back up your claim.

Ty for your bitcoins sir!

piss is your fetish?

topkek
people here never heard about conservation of information?

>If you're going to claim something, be prepared to defend it. Otherwise say nothing.
going to need you to defend that claim
with credible source please
otherwise, why did you say anything at all? holy fuck this place reeks of retarded these days

You're the one rabbiting on about science. You should know how science works since you're so smart. You make a claim. And then you defend it against peers. Now shut the fuck up and explain your claim and stop deflecting.

>but it won't be deleted for what the universe concerns.

Claims it won't be deleted because universe.

Calls out horse shit.

Claims its science.

Asked to explain it.

Says "it's physics".

Again asked to explain it.

And for a third time.

Claims information is indestructible. Fails to provide evidence to back up claim. Because it's impossible as it would make him a leading expert in the world of physics and he wouldn't be on Sup Forums.

Refuses to provide evidence for his claim. Because he can't.

Can't back up claim, so deflects.

Again can't back up claim, so deflects.

It's pointed out that science involves making a claim and defending it against peers. It's impossible to defend it if he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about because he can't even elaborate on his claim.

The guy's a fucking pretentious cunt.

Unblur this Gaussian blur.

Information not being destroyed doesn't mean all information previously in that image is still preserved in that image after blurring.The information is influencing the PC doing the blur, altering it's emissions. The info you tried to obfuscate in the image is still in this universe but not necessarily in this image.

In no way is it a requirement the we can reconstruct this info with our current or future technology.

"Knowing the algorithm that blurred it, would make it easily reversible"

It's 2lewd sorry

that is complete conjecture. for all you know quantum mechanics is truly stochastic and collapsing wave functions is irreversible.

where is your hard determinism now?

MODS?!

"Information can't be destroyed" is about as basic as "energy can't be lost".
Bottom line is that if you can snapshot the state of the universe and you also know the rules of the universe then you can reconstruct any state in the past and any state in the future.
Then black holes come in and there's some discussion about that en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox

...

I saw retards arguing about something that's literally just a google search away and decided to provide basic information about the topic.
I could also make the reverse "for all you know" claim. Right now that is what is generally considered to be the correct assumption.

I too can google and pretend to know what I'm talking about.

You still don't know siht.

I have some basic understanding of the topic without googling. I mentioned google because you retards wrote a dozen "no u" replies and google could've saved you some effort.
I did use google to find the wikipedia link though.

You're clearly just as unqualified to question this.

>complains about "no u" repiles.
>no u's

>You're clearly just as unqualified to question this.

As unqualified as yourself.

Collapse only occurs when looking at sub-system and ignoring the rest of the system.

for non-french ppl :
yesterday evening, a documentary about bitcoin was broadcast, and a bitcoin millionaire put up this QR code, saying he would giveout thousands of euros in BTC.

As it was shown on national public TV, said QR code was blurred.

OP is a faggot that wants to get rich on your back.

>out of arguments
I'm glad we're on the same page. If you want to keep attacking a well-established tenet then I suggest discussing it with someone who's actually working in the field.

Yes, thank you for repeating what I said.

You're a real sanctimonious cunt.

Thanks, I try.

you add energy to the system

You can't

Make a contract with QB

I'm glad niggers are overrunning that place.

i did not know that watching les anges de la télé could make me rich or something