160 karma · joined October 17, 2019
Uncalibrated screens photographed at different angles in different lighting conditions are not a valid basis for comparison. If you want properly calibrated displays, you need to purchase hardware (datacolor makes one such device) and calibrate them.
Even "factory-calibrated" monitors will benefit from this, because the quality of that calibration varies widely and your color reproduction is going to vary based on ambient lighting conditions etc.
The palette is so pretty, I wonder how the whole LCH color space quantized down to 4096 colors looks. I find limited bitdepth color spaces fascinating to look at, there's so many choices about how to represent color they can look wildly different.
We really do live in interesting times. Usually I feel pretty confident about predicting how a trend will continue, but as it is the only prediction I can make with confidence for this latest AI research is that it is and will be used by militaries to kill a lot of people. Oh, hey, that's another thing this article could have listed!
Outside of that, all bets are open. Possible wagers include: "Turns out to be mostly useful in specific niche applications and only seemingly useful anywhere else", "Extremely useful for businesses looking to offset responsibility for unpopular decisions", "Ushers in an end to work and a golden age for all mankind", "Ushers in an end to work and a dark age for most of the world", "Combines with profit motives to damage all art, culture, and community", etc etc.
I know many folk have strong opinions one way or the other, but I think it's literally anyone's game at this point, though I will say I'm not leaning optimistic.
I'm not a biologist or chemist, so I don't know enough to judge if the method listed here is completely safe, but even a cursory google shows cause to be concerned: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17435390.2018.1...
Or you could reduce the texture complexity to a 2D texture without raytracing if you defined the coin mathematically in the shader. Heck, you could get rid of the texture entirely and just do everything with math in the shader.
3D graphics used to require rigid hardware distinctions between vertices and textures and etc, but in modern pipelines it's pretty much all data and the programmer decides what to do with it.
I mean, people can recite poetry far longer, even nonsense poetry ("Twas brillig, and the slithy toves / did gyre and gimble in the wabe") so it's not impossible. But generally speaking, yeah. Nobody wants to navigate to that bit of jabberwocky instead of google.com
It does kind of make me long for the days of the HOSTS file, where anyone might alias a hard-to-remember address as something locally meaningful.
OTOH I wouldn't want to self-host because I know I'm not going to spend the same amount of time and effort a full security staff would, even if my self-hosted box would make a much less attractive target.
It's quite a pickle.
I'm actually really excited for Lenovo's upcoming T1 wearable display. It's a monitor in glasses form, not VR, but I realized that the appeal of VR desktop environments for me is having a large screen, not the whole VR shtick.
Couple that display with output from my phone running JupyterLab, and I'll have a desktop-like development environment that fits in my pocket. Perfect for travel and long backpacking trips.
With the subscriptions, you're paying $600+ a year, every year, in perpetuity, and you're subjected to invasive DRM that'll do shit like delete fonts you haven't used recently.
Before subscriptions, upgrades were often cheaper than buying new, and you might only buy an upgrade every four or five years (the core requirements of a graphics app don't change majorly, so new versions are more about stability, optimizations, and the occasional niche feature).
... thankfully, there's enough competition in this space that I've managed to completely remove Adobe from my toolset, but it still sucks that I can't even activate my 2013 version of Adobe's Creative Suite (CS6) because the licensing servers no longer function.
My gut says that the quality could be rapidly improved without changing the underlying design at all.
The real issue with this, I think, is that motion capture for humans is already widely available and provides much higher fidelity and control than text. Unless I'm misreading the paper badly, this model was trained on exactly such data. Blending between multiple animations through motion capture is also well-understood.
So while the results are impressive, the practical gains seem very marginal. I think perhaps that the equivalent to "inpainting" (as mentioned in the text) and "style transfer" would be the big gain here? If we could use this to retarget animations to different body plans (child, adult, space monster) quickly, or for smarter interpolation between human-authored keyframes, I could see that being a much-desired tool.
Nobody complains when a consultant is hired in this capacity, and yet sensitivity readers, whose role is broadly similar, are somehow considered bad? It's not like they rewrite your whole book- they offer notes for things that don't make sense given the characters and plot, just as a developmental editor might.
A publisher doesn't just print the text they're given, they edit it, suggesting changes they believe will help it be better (and thus sell better). There's a back and forth dialog between editors and authors, and it's entirely possible either side might walk away if there's no willingness to compromise. This happens to all books that aren't self-published. Adding another type of editor to the mix isn't gatekeeping.
Alternatively I guess it could just pull harder towards the prompt, idk.
When a library buys a physical book, they can loan that copy out to patrons. They own the physical book.
For over ten years now, libraries have taken a single physical book, scanned it and removed the book from circulation, and lent out a single ebook. This has been a common practice founded on an interpretation of fair use laws, which allow format shifting (recording a vhs to DVD, for example) and lending, and also copyright laws which explicitly mention the legality of digitizing books for accessibility reasons, to serve the visually impaired.
This "one physical book in storage equals one ebook" lending is the "controlled digital lending" the archive does, and is the issue at stake in this suit. Publishers argue that libraries should not be allowed to lend any ebook except those which they set a specific lending limit to- charging the library a fee every X number of checkouts or every X number of months.
This is obviously not how lending physical books works- the library can buy a hardcover and loan it out to patrons, repairing the spine and binding over and over, eventually moving it to a special collection for viewing on site when it's hundreds of years old and can't be handled.
As a seperate, and legally shaker issue, the internet archive created the "national emergency library" during the pandemic. The logic here was that nearly every library in the country was closed, there were within those libraries physical copies of these books that weren't being lent out, and so the same concept as controlled digital lending could apply. This move by the archive was signed onto and supported by thousands of libraries around the country, who agreed that their uncirculated physical copies could stand in for the extra copies checked out of the archives emergency library.
It's important to note the archive does not loan any book published in the last five years, period. This is a self imposed limitation that your neighborhood library does not work under, but it means that the "lost sales" publishers allege were not of new books. Nobody ever got screwed out of bestseller status because too many library patrons read their book, and that goes doubly so in this case.
All that said, the issue isn't whether the internet archive messed up with it's national emergency library. It's whether the whole concept of loaning a book is limited to printed copies, and thus ebooks must be repurchased by libraries ad nauseum-- or if libraries can keep a physical copy in a storage room and loan out a digital copy one at a time, exactly as they do now.
Bottom line, our libraries (and especially their ebook collections) will be much poorer if this decision goes to publishers.
I pay for this workspace: $9.75/month-Hourly-Windows licensed-Performance-2vCPU,8GB Memory,80GB Root,50GB User
Since I'm only doing layout on an as-needed basis while hiking, rather than doing it full time, I tend to spend around $45 or less a month.
There was definitely some squinting at the screen involved, heh.
I use termux to host a jupyterlab instance and bring along a tiny folding bluetooth keyboard. Even in airplane mode I can connect to the locally hosted jupyterlab instance. Notebooks are kept in git and synced up to my private repo when I'm back on grid.
There are simpler solutions for writing, but this allows me to keep a single workflow across home/travel contexts. Being able to run graphs, basic code and computation as needed is also a plus.
While developing this did you come up with any best practice recommendations for individual nodes?
Having shared languages is awesome, allowing people to communicate together. But having only one language would be a great tragedy. It'd be like saying all paintings can only use one color.
The head of the company was pushing to modernize our process flow via software meant to drive manufacturing. We had contractors on site from three different companies who were each using us as a test-bed for their software/manufacturing integration. Every week or two they'd plot out some new data they'd need to move from sales to engineering, manufacturing, QC, etc.
In our case, having GraphQL as a translation layer for the sales website saved everyone involved time. However, I can also see many scenarios where that wouldn't have been the case.
It definitely comes down to using the right tool for the job. Knowing how to identify which tools fit and which don't is one of the skills it's very important to help new devs develop.
Specifically interesting in this context is that the turn of the 20th century, and the 1920s in particular, is really the birth place of modern immigration policy.
Of note is the fact that the requirement of visas for entry and quotas on point of origin appeared around this time- if you read newspaper op-eds for the immigration act of 1924 (or the earlier chinese exclusion act), these measures are specifically pointed out as a way to maintain the racial makeup of the country.
Prior to that point, visitors could just turn up at Ellis island for entry. Afterwards, the island itself served more as an offshore detention center for what were then classified as radicals, anarchists, and those "likely to become a public charge"— awaiting deportation.
Citizenship, too, could once be had for as little as the price of a dozen eggs-- check out this booklet published 1921: https://archive.org/details/howtotakeoutyour00metrrich/page/...
"All it costs is $1, not a penny more. No witnesses, no examination, no pull required." -- 2 years of residence later, another set of papers (also on Archive.org) and a short literacy test (added in 1917) and you could be a citizen-- but this rapidly changed as additional quotas and restrictions were added.
The history of immigration law is a fascinating topic, and there's a lot of interesting primary sources available.