OLEDs have many drawbacks that make them a no-go. They're dim, have bad text rendering, use a lot of power, and get permanent burn in on static UIs.
In return you get "deep blacks". But photographers have been raising black levels since forever because it turns out it makes pictures more pleasant. So, uh.
I have never seen bad text rendering on an OLED. Which ones have you seen that have bad text rendering? I recently replaced a Sony X900E with a LG C4. Text is crisp and power usage dropped going to the OLED.
Permanent burn-in will happen with static images, but it happened on CRTs too and those once dominated the world. As long as it is infrequent, it is probably not much of an issue. Newer OLEDs, such as Apple’s tandem OLEDs, minimize the issue.
I am not sure what you think your point about black levels contributes to the discussion. Higher black levels would only favor OLEDs thanks to their inky blacks.
OLED displays don't inherently have poor text rendering, but they tend to use more exotic subpixel layouts than LCD displays [0]. It's possible to render text well with alternative subpixel layouts (for example, every iPhone), but if you use the standard RGB/BGR algorithm with PenTile displays, you're going to get bad results (but with a high enough resolution, it doesn't really make much of a difference).
Yes, OLEDs are notably dim compared to eg the cheaper mini-led displays. That's why OLED displays aren't recommended for environments with ambient light like windows or mandatory lighting.
You're right - it's disgusting that their government told them that Nazism is bad and that they should fight to defend their own country. Fucking appalling, really.
Just to clarify, what you're saying is that the nazis weren't actually all that bad, the British history books have just deliberately written them as bad people?
I don't think that's what the parent was saying. They are saying the Nazis are truly evil, but the Brits are also truly evil. A different truly evil, of course, I'm not going to weigh tragedies against one another.
And they're not wrong. The British empire killed millions through policy -- read up on the Bengali famine to understand one example where Britain killed millions. Britain was one of the earliest users of concentration camps, deploying them during the Boer War.
This feels very broad strokes. It's like saying Germany is bad because of Nazi Germany. That's not to excuse terrible actions but that these histories are long with a variety of leaders and popular beliefs. So viewing a country as a monolith in line with all its past crimes seems very nationalistic.
Using more current context, leadership and events seems like a more realistic view of things. Which doesn't mean the UK is a shining beacon of freedom or democracy, but just to better explain why things happen instead of blaming events of leaders who are not in office or even alive.
They're not saying the Nazis are truly evil at all, they're just saying that the British people shouldn't have fought the Nazis or were hoodwinked by the govt.
The British were evil, the Chinese were evil, the Japanese were evil, the Belgians were evil, the Spanish were evil, the Incas were evil, the Mongols were evil, the French were evil, the Iroquois were evil, the ancient Egyptians were evil, etc etc etc.
the emergent behavior from ephemeral posting has become a feature by this point. and while it does technically have accounts, they don't at all work like a normal social media account. they aren't published, and using the "this is for sure me" tripcode feature is socially frowned upon.
I doubt it heavily. CF has control over a large chunk of the global internet - they're not going to go thru their clients one by one and make sure they're doing age verification. That's absurd and far too expensive.
The alternative to that is either:
1. UK blocks cloudflare (unlikely, come on now)
2. UK gives cloudflare a pass (fairly common)
3. Somewhere in-between. Maybe UK cares about highly visible people behind cloudflare like 4Chan but not others.
Yeah that's option 3, for now. But they won't go after cloudflare in the general case because it's too risky IMO. And cloudflare will only comply to the absolute minimum they can get away with, because they can't burn money auditing every single customer behind cloudflare.
I think if that were true, there would have at least been an attempt at a court case at the very least. But AFAIK every case they have been involved in, they've won. I am not defending their content, merely a right to exist, especially when you're not breaking any applicable laws.
If you want to talk about content that objectively breaks laws... 8chan hosts monkey torture videos.
Cloudflare isn't capable of that - it can only block downloading CSAM not uploading it. (Which means the moderators wouldn't be able to see it either.)
My experience is that gpt-oss doesn't know much about obscure topics, so if you're using it for anything except puzzles or coding in popular languages, it won't do well as the bigger models.
It's knowledge seems to be lacking even compared to gpt3.
Something I was doing informally that seems very effective is asking for details about smaller cities and towns and lesser points of interest around the world. Bigger models tend to have a much better understanding and knowledge base for the more obscure places.
I would really love if they figured out how to train a model that doesn't have any such knowledge baked it, but knows where to look for it. Maybe even has a clever database for that. Knowing this kind of trivia like this consistently of the top of your head is a sign of deranged mind, artificial or not.
The problem is that these models can't reason about what they do and do not know, so right now you basically need to tune it to:
1) always look up all trivia, or
2) occasionally look up trivia when it "seems complex" enough.
Would that work as well? If I ask a big model to write like Shakespeare it just knows intuitively how to do that. If it didn't and had to look up how to do that, I'm not sure it would do a good job.
I wonder if we're doing the wrong thing blocking them with invasive tools like cloudflare?
If all you're concerned about is server load, wouldn't it be better to just offer a tar file containing all of your pages they can download instead? The models are months out of date, so a monthly dumb would surely satisfy them. There could even be some coordination for this.
They're going to crawl anyway. We can either cooperate or turn it into some weird dark market with bad externalities like drugs.
A tar file would be better if the crawlers would use it, but even sites with well-publicised options for bulk downloads (like wikipedia) are getting hammered by the bots.
Right. I don't care if AI (or anything else) indexes or learns from my sites. That's what they're there for. But yesterday I blocked an IP that hit one of my sites 82000 times in an hour, or 22/second. And apparently it's a very stupid bot, because it kept redownloading CSS and other asset files every time it saw a link to them.
There's no way the people behind that bot are going to follow any suggestions to make it behave better. After all, adding things like caching and rate-limiting to your web crawler might take a few hours, and who's got time for that.
Yeah, I am in the opposing camp too - I don't use Cloudflare's bot fight tooling on any of our high traffic websites. I'm not seeing the issue with allowing bots to crawl our websites other than some additional spend for bandwidth. Agent mode is pretty powerful when paired with a website that cooperates, and if people want to use AI to interact with our data then what's wrong with that?
If the crawlers were aware of these archive files, and would be willing to use it, then that would help, but it isn't. (It would also help to know which dynamic files are worthless for archiving and mirroring, but they will often ignore that.)
This is a cool project and I want go give it a go in my spare time.
However what gives me pause is the sheer number of possibly compromised microphones all around me (phones, tablets, laptops, tv etc) at all times, which makes spying much easier than if I use a keyboard.
In return you get "deep blacks". But photographers have been raising black levels since forever because it turns out it makes pictures more pleasant. So, uh.
reply