automatoney

Wow what a touching compliment, thank you so much!!

Woah I LOVE both of these! When I get a chance these are 100% getting linked from the writeup.

There's a lot of really good research papers that touch on this area from what I saw - would definitely be cool to see if that extra nuance could be added without dramatically increasing the math complexity; in its current state, the code could be used in any programming language without a library.

Yes, 2.0 is the value I tuned the equations around - but I think there's definitely room for improvement in terms of squashing the space along the fair/deep axis in order to get better results at lower R^2.

The issue I ran into was what happens when the space moves beyond RGB, but I think the fix is to just add clamps to the end R, G, B values.

Good catch, added MIT license - feel free to use it! On top of that, my understanding is that math/equations are not subject to copyright, so the core part of this work (the equations/ideas) I think legally has 0 limitations - even if there were a restrictive license. But IANAL so might have some misconceptions.

Oh wow, didn't even think of how that sort of thing might affect the page.

Thanks! I hope to send lots of love those ways, they're basically all things that I found outside of this work that I liked enough to remember (I think Humanae was the one that I found while doing this).

Thank you! I call out the manual labeling bias and also that a future work improvement would be to be scientific about that labeling process (multiple labelers, expert labelers), and then to feed that into the equation generation steps. Part of where the "good enough" naming comes from - I was hoping that using my art brain and keeping a bunch of reference images in mind (shout out to the Humanae project) would maybe offset the bias a bit. But 100% right on the bias being there.

Yes absolutely right on - I mention much deeper in the page that in a picker UI you can use a bigger range, but that in a generation context you might want to be a bit more selective. I go into it a bit more when I explain what R^2 is.

"not sure if there's a way to solve that problem without excluding some real colors too" - 100% right on that too. A big part of this work was to define a way to tweak/improve the equations in order to approach a solution to these issues - part of my hope in sharing is to get more eyes and brains thinking about this and proposing improvements!

In sharing this around I've found more people than I thought who've done things to semantically chop up the color space - definitely a more interesting area than I first thought of when working on my narrow use case. Feels like it'd be fun to play with something that has a whole bunch of different regions of color space labeled - like "here's where IsPastel overlaps with IsGreen".

But absolutely the hope is that this is a tool that stays accessible to people for whatever they're building and everyone can slow down on reinventing the wheel here for every character creator/digital art application.

I feel similarly to the author, and I appreciate the links to other authors with similar sentiments - "hirirng a taskrabbit to solve a puzzle" or "feeling nothing about the results". I don't enjoy using LLMs, and I'm sad that it feels like we are a shrinking minority of programmers. It feels like a growing gulf that I increasingly don't want to try and reach across - I do not have fun with this tool, and I don't really want to hang around somewhere people are frequently pedaling it.

At the very least the change has made me reduce the amount of time I spend here. But I'm still a bit bummed about it.

There's some genuinely interesting tips in here, but #10 is for sure just padding so they could call the article "10 Hacks" haha. Everything else is at least somewhat Python specific, but "Hack 10: Avoid repeated function calls in loops" is just applicable to anything.

I've never understood why people care so much about the linter settings. It's so obviously bikeshedding, just make a choice, run the linter automatically and be done with it. I'm too busy doing actual software engineering to care about where exactly everything goes - I promise after a week you'll just get used to whatever format your team lands on.

The writing feels odd in a sort of off putting way. Maybe too much vividness and a kind of pseudointellectual vibe. Or like a bit egotistical? I don't know if that's what you're getting at, but it's what I was getting from it.

Your comment made me realize that maybe we're just going through the transition to a collectively better understanding of people. Right now we sort of have to pass through the clinical diagnosis/therapy terms in order to recognize something as not being a moral failure/making someone less valuable as a person. And then the next step we're building to is maybe like acceptance of people's differences without needing to make reference to diagnostic labels. Kind of like what's happened with queerness: past - fluid, undefined, marginalized; present - labels, understanding, less marginalization; future - moving beyond the need for labels in order for people to accept and understand.

Word embeddings (that 1000-dimension vector you mention) are not new. No comment on the rest of your comment, but that aspect of LLMs is "old" tech - word2vec was published 11 years ago.

A little strange to compare it to palm reading, I feel like a more apt comparison is some other random medical field like podiatry. I wouldn't expect my friends' podiatrist usage to come up, so I'm sure more of my friends than I know have been to one. And presumably, like with podiatry, all the people who need professional therapists are people who are experiencing issues in the relevant area.

I haven't run into this person but I'd love to hear about problems you've seen people create - I can't even think of a problem I could create and fix.

To my biased ears it sounds like these configuration-like files are a borderline DSL that maybe isn't being treated as such. I feel like that's a common issue - people assume because you call it a config file, it's not a language, and so it doesn't get treated as actual code that gets interpreted.

Taken as a whole, the title guidelines feel more focused on titles of articles, rather than whole website titles. I can understand the complaint, but in my opinion this title is fine. The title just feels a little... bare without the note.

Oh wow, I haven't heard of theis "plastic pollution treaty" it sounds super promising! I think one of the things that makes this issue so popular is just how obvious it is to see plastic trash all over the place. Climate change and carbon emissions can be a bit abstract, but plastic pollution is everywhere, and extremely visible.

I don't have super strong feelings on congestion pricing, but I'm a bit skeptical of anyone who says working class people are the major car users in NYC.

But all that aside, why aren't we talking about the insantiy that is free street parking. I have to pay $$$ for my small apartment, but your car gets to hang out all day for free? If you live and work in Manhattan, especially the congestion zone, you don't need a car for personal use.

In the United States, likeness rights vary by state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

Probably should have just said POC in my parent comment to skip all this side discussion, but the repetition is the point. - it's used for emphasis.

From wikipedia:

"The term aims to emphasize the historic oppression of black and indigenous people, which is argued to be superlative and distinctive in U.S. history at the collective level."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_color#BIPOC

I'm personally increasingly less interested in language-focused critiques when it comes to systemic issues. The article makes interesting points, but I think the effort it's trying to make is kind of on a euphemism treadmill. The article even says it - the issue is not with the terminology itself, but with the valuation of certain skillsets over certain other ones under our current economic system. It's also a bit pedantic - in this context it doesn't really make sense to use the dictionary to cite the "hierarchy" of what a word means. The word is being used in a specific context, and so it makes more sense to talk about it there.

I'd think I'd be more sympathetic if there were an alternative advocated for that wasn't just "don't refer to this concept". The concept itself isn't problematic - non "computery" people think about computers differently, and it is useful to discuss non-computer-expert users.

Even just thinking about other terminology - we use BIPOC for "non-white" because umbrella terms are useful. It's not that we shouldn't have a term, it's that maybe there's a better one.

I haven't read any Marucs Aurelius, so my impression might be off, but the way the AI speaks feels... I don't know, like a British person, or some American from an older time? It keeps saying "my dear" which feels very incorrect. I studied Latin in school, so maybe I'm more used to the translationese and odd grammar you see with that (like here - although this is also an older translation so you get some of that older english vibe https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2680/pg2680-images.html)

I'm guessing this was trained on a certain translation of his works, but I think part of the fun of speaking to a bot would be to replicate that sort of language barrier feeling.

As a hobbyist game developer, I would love to see the field move away from being so windows focused. It's pretty annoying that every other kind of development I do works well enough across all platforms, but when I want to do game dev I pretty much have to boot into windows.

And as a game user, I would also just rather have games be cross platform, than use whatever OS specific optimizations happen now. But I've also never really cared too much about having high framerates, high resolution, millions of polygons, etc.

Looks like this is forked from the original at https://github.com/28klotlucas2/Mario64webgl ?

Pretty interesting to have a list, but I was kind of hoping there'd be more information. The FAQ is a good start, and there's the link to wikipedia, but I was hoping for more insight than "Moai are cool. And video games are cool." More information that moves the site from a plain dataset to a more complex discussion. Just as an example, I was wondering what present day Rapa Nui people think of depictions of moai. Are there kinds of depictions that they feel represent/misrepresent their culture?

It's called a loft bed - this one would probably be considered a low loft. This kind of bed is also frequently seen in American university dorm rooms.