this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1554 points (97.8% liked)

memes

10637 readers
3420 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If you're using the book correctly, you couldn't say the same thing. Using a flora book to identify a plant requires learning about morphology and by having that alone you're already significantly closer to accurately identifying most things. If a dichotomous key tells you that the terminating leaflet is sessile vs. not sessile, and you're actually looking at that on the physical plant, your quality of observation is so much better than just photographing a plant and throwing it up on inaturalist

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Not to mention, the book is probably going to list look-alike plants, and mention if they are toxic. AI is just going to go "It's this thing".

[–] Iceman@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

You can easily say the same thing. Use the image identification to get a name of the plant and google it to read about checking if the sessile is leafy or no.