> The second solution is much more plausible, but still very difficult. The user would have to be pointing the camera at the subject for long enough such that the drift in their aim at the subject is smaller than the drift from the rotation of the earth. This is also implausible. What is concerning though, is that this second method is one that could work very well to cancel out Earth’s rotation on the CIPA specified stabilization test apparatus.
So, basically dieselgate but for image stabilization
It seems the camera could use optical flow to get a baseline reading and calibrate the inertial frame offsets. They don't need to point accurately for a long time?
Or maybe that is the method they assume for the second solution and they calculated that it's infeasible.
So, basically dieselgate but for image stabilization