So, sure that might work. More likely they forgot this bit is even here on account of it being 20 years old.
Also, never doubt the persistence of a sufficiently motivated and impatient user. I don’t think needing to read something has ever stopped one.
You can literally put animated flaming text and people will click right past.
Yup, you found the developer. That’s his phone number.
It’s not exactly a new change either. In 2006 people weren’t going to the specific page from duckduckgo, they were probably finding the sqlite homepage, and then tracking down the contact info.
20 years later it’s probably better to maintain consistency with the prefix than to change it even if it’s weird.
You are correct. The person you’re replying to misread my set as a fancy way of saying “all natural numbers”, not “all primes”.
So you’re both right, in that if 1 were a prime, the primes would not work right, and if 1 were not a natural number then those would not work right.
Using the totient function to define the set of primes is admittedly basically just using it for the fancy symbol I’ll admit, and the better name for where we keep all the primes is the blackboard bold P. 😊
Oh, no that’s just the primes. I was responding to a person joking about how we don’t even know all the primes, so I used a technical yet unhelpful definition of “the set of all primes” to be technically correct,xas is the mathematics way. :)
Whoa there, if you want it’s physical location you’ll have to ask a physicist, they’re in charge of tangible things.
Otherwise, just take a turn perpendicular to the reals, or check in the platonic realm.
Well, either they can’t find everything in that system, or they can also find something that contradicts something else that’s true.
It balances out, because while there’s infinite facts they can’t prove, there’s also infinite lies they can prove.
I know exactly how to find it, and unless you’re a mathematician I’m not sure you’re authorized to know.
, or ℙ for short.
I think that should be all of them, but if you want to check, there are references on the website where we keep all the numbers detailing how to check any number, or to list all of them if you want an arbitrarily large pile or have infinite time on your hands. :)
Yeah, it’s not like the mathematics lost any of the numbers. Get your shit together physicists.
Totally agree on the sensitive or decisive topics point, but I include a caveat that what some people call “sharing decisive viewpoints in public”, others call “not hiding their gender/sexual orientation”, and similar things, so it’s not always perfectly clear cut.
I try to avoid being inflammatory in general, anonymous or not, and I’m not perturbed if people know my city, industry, trade, and vague interests. Basically what you could figure out from a polite conversation while waiting in line.
I’ve got a lot of code up on GitHub, and some of it is absolute garbage. If an employer judges me poorly for sharing my pile of one-off scripts, or “basic human decency and lack of respect for neo Nazis in a casual setting”, then I frankly probably don’t care to work for them.
Admittedly, other than a script that automates figuring out which web hosts are hosting hate groups, there’s not much political content in my software.
I do alright, so my system seems to work.
I’m not a lazy ass, I’m just doing my part for the pollinators and insect populations. By being a lazy ass and not giving a shit about yards beyond what in legally required to.
To add to the metal, the blueprints include the blueprints for the processor.
https://hackaday.com/2024/05/06/the-computers-of-voyager/
They don’t use a microprocessor like anything today would, but a pile of chips that provide things like logic gates and counters. A grown up version of https://gigatron.io/
That means “written in assembly” means “written in a bespoke assembly dialect that we maybe didn’t document very well, or the hardware it ran on, which was also bespoke”.
I am not sure it’s the same software, but it’s a fairly good guess I think. Same software capabilities and same lab, with the same area of research.
Geoguesser is a subset of the skills used for general image geo location for open source intelligence.
In the specific cases of only using the data present in the image and relying on geographic information, it certainly does better.
Humans still do better, and can reach decent skill with minimal training, at placing images that require spatial reasoning or referencing multiple data sources.
AI tools will likely be able to learn those extra skills, but it doesn’t change that it’s the photo that’s the data leak, and not the tool. The tool just makes it vastly more accessible, and part of the task easier for curious human.
Some blues are reversible, and some aren’t. Some of them do a statistical rearrangement of the data in the area being blurred that’s effectively reversible.
Think shredding a document. It’s a pain and it might take a minute, but it’s feasible to get the original document back, give or take some overlapping edges and tape.
Other blurs combine, distort, and alter the image contents such that there’s nothing there to recombine to get the original.
A motion blur or the typical “fuzzy” blur can be directly reversed for the former, and statistical techniques and AI tools can be used on the later to reconstruct, because the original data is still there, or there enough that you can make guesses based on what’s there and context.
Pixelating the area does a better job because it actually deletes information as opposed to just smearing it around, but tools can still pick out lines and shapes well enough to make informed guesses.
Some blurs however create a random noise over the area being blurred, which is then tweaked to fit the context of whatever was being blurred.
Something like that is impossible to reverse because the information simply is not there.
It’s like using generative AI to “recover” data cropped from an image. At that point it’s no longer recovery, but creation of possible data that would fit there.
The tools aren’t magical, they’re still ultimately bound by the rules of information storage.
I mean, yes, but that’s not what they’re doing.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.05845 https://github.com/LukasHaas/PIGEON
It’s a Stanford project that does what it looks like is happening in the screenshot.
https://github.com/LukasHaas/PIGEON
https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.05845
Basically a combination of what the game geoguesser does, and public geotagged images to be able to get a decent shot at approximate location for previously unseen areas.
It’s more ominous when automated, but with only a little practice it’s easy enough for a human to get significantly better.
EDIT: yup, looks like this is the guy from the Twitter: https://andrewgao.dev/ and he’s Stanford affiliated with the same department that made the above paper and system.
https://arxiv.org/html/2307.05845v4
I believe this is the paper
Geo guessing is related to open source intelligence techniques, and it’s pretty easy to get surprisingly good at it.
People who are good at it can take a picture of someone’s room and deduce enough about them (sometimes) to be able to get their name, address and phone number.
It being automatic is pretty cool, but you were already leaking the information to anyone interested.
https://www.sans.org/blog/geolocation-resources-for-osint-investigations/
I think you’re reading way to much into things.
Nine articles is not a “wave” or “trending”, and if you had read any of them they’re essentially non-sensational, explain that the image is notable because of its role in the development of digital imagery, why they’re moving away, and why that’s for the best.
Jumping from a small number of neutral articles in either explicitly technical or technology adjacent sources to a “wave” of sensationalist agitation targeting older dissatisfied white men is, frankly, really fucking weird.
With your “I don’t work in this field, why do I need to hear about this” it really feels like your saying anything you don’t care about shouldn’t be reported on, and if it is reported on, it’s because someone must have an ulterior motive.
It’s been a near standard test image for decades. Deprecating it is a model case for a low stakes info piece if you’re a tech publication. News you’re not interested in isn’t automatically cultural warfare.
I worked for a developer at a Web hosting company for a while. I really wish my story about flaming text wasn’t true, and that the words weren’t “permanent unrecoverable data loss”, and the audience wasn’t internal support technicians.
Gotta have a way to delete a vps, and there’s only so much you can do to get someone to check that they have the right one.