Off-and-on trying out an account over at @tal@oleo.cafe due to scraping bots bogging down lemmy.today to the point of near-unusability.
- Jump
What's one highly extolled piece of media that you absolutely cannot stand in any way shape or form.
When did you watch it? When it came out, it was technically impressive for the computer-generated graphics, which included a lot of highly-detailed and expansive "organic" stuff like forests.
Here's some quotes from the Roger Ebert review from the time:
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/avatar-2009
Like “Star Wars” and “LOTR,” “Avatar” employs a new generation of special effects. Cameron said it would, and many doubted him. It does. Pandora is very largely CGI. The Na’vi are embodied through motion capture techniques, convincingly. They look like specific, persuasive individuals, yet sidestep the eerie Uncanny Valley effect. And Cameron and his artists succeed at the difficult challenge of making Neytiri a blue-skinned giantess with golden eyes and a long, supple tail, and yet–I’ll be damned. Sexy.
Cameron promised he’d unveil the next generation of 3-D in “Avatar.” I’m a notorious skeptic about this process, a needless distraction from the perfect realism of movies in 2-D. Cameron’s iteration is the best I’ve seen — and more importantly, one of the most carefully-employed. The film never uses 3-D simply because it has it, and doesn’t promiscuously violate the fourth wall.
I mean, I remember being underwhelmed after I went to watch Avatar with a friend who was deeply impressed, but it did show off a lot of render capability for the time. I'd call it more impressive as a tech demo.
- Jump
What's one highly extolled piece of media that you absolutely cannot stand in any way shape or form.
I think that it's reasonable to like or dislike something without them needing to analyze further for that opinion to be valid. I think it's fine for someone to say that they don't like the taste of, say, strawberry ice cream without being obligated to break it down further. I mean, people form opinions without trying to psychologically analyze themselves.
And I don't think that people generally "choose to not like something" either. People don't say to themselves anything like "I think I'll dislike the flavor of strawberry ice cream."
- Jump
What's one highly extolled piece of media that you absolutely cannot stand in any way shape or form.
Citizen Kane
@9point6@lemmy.world has a comment below stating that some of these are examples where a piece of media did something new and innovative that was so compelling that many subsequent pieces of media copied it, and thus whatever it was that the piece of media did failed to impress later audiences. For them, it was just the new normal. So the work was very influential...but maybe no longer stands out.
I've often seen Citizen Kane cited as being the poster child for this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane
The film's narrative structure, cinematography and themes have influenced countless filmmakers and films worldwide, asserting its place as a cornerstone in the history of cinema
EDIT:
https://thecinemaholic.com/citizen-kane-innovations-flaws/
‘Citizen Kane’: The Innovations, the Flaws, and the Films that it Influenced
EDIT2: @marzhall@lemmy.world linked to the Seinfeld is Unfunny trope on TVTropes, and it has an entry for Citizen Kane:
Citizen Kane, oftentimes trumpeted as "The Greatest Movie of All Time," tends to inspire "what's the big deal?" responses from modern viewers, especially since Post Modern movies have become the norm and the cinematography has influenced so many other films. And everyone knows what the twist at the end is.
Yeah, that's true. But...if a website derives its revenue from ads, a non-ad-viewing user --- and users who switch browsers so as to use an ad blocker would presumably be blocking ads --- loses that website money rather than generating it. Like, for such a website, the issue would be how many Firefox users that do view ads would be lost if their website didn't work on Firefox.
Those of you who remember the early 2000s, when Internet Explorer had very high marketshare, probably remember a number of websites that didn't work with other browsers.
- Jump
What's one highly extolled piece of media that you absolutely cannot stand in any way shape or form.
Not quite what you're asking for, because this one I can at least stand to watch, but Futurama was one of the biggest "I'm not impressed but know people who adore it" pieces of media for me.
I've liked past Matt Groening stuff. I liked Life is Hell. I liked (earlier) The Simpsons stuff.
I've sat next to people who crack up while watching Futurama.
But I don't think I've ever chuckled at the humor in Futurama. It throws out a series of jokes that just don't make me chuckle at all.
That being said, I haven't watched it for some time, so I haven't seen the newer stuff.
- Jump
What's one highly extolled piece of media that you absolutely cannot stand in any way shape or form.
The Game of Thrones TV series.
I really enjoyed the George R. R. Martin novels that they were based on, but the TV series just didn't do it for me.
I did enjoy the Lord of the Rings movies, so I know that it's possible to do film adaptations of fantasy novels that do click with me.
I think that the concern is whether a number of websites might stop working with Firefox if Chrome users consistently represent ad revenue and Firefox users generally don't.
I use Firefox, but it has relatively-limited marketshare in 2026. A lot of people just browse on mobile devices and on Android devices, and there Chrome's probably the default browser.
https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/
Chrome at 70.25%.
Safari at 15.72%.
Edge at 5.14%.
Firefox at 2.19%.
There's also the Telo MT1. Costs significantly more, but I understand that it's expected to have a longer range. It's also a small EV truck.
https://www.electricforall.org/rebates-incentives/
They do say that while the federal rebate is gone, some state rebates do still exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automobiles_manufactured_in_the_United_States
Also, less of, say, the Ford F-150 is done in the US than are Honda's or Toyota's models, so at some point, the question of what exactly one means by "US auto manufacturer" does arise.
So, are you going to require matching the framerate between the user's camera and the played video? Because if not, there won't be a 1:1 correspondence between the two, and even if they're at the same framerate, additionally you're going to need to identify the start frame.
I didn't poke around too deeply, but if it assigns a frame number to each QR code and encodes it in the code, maybe you can scan each frame of user video and discard duplicates.
If this is going to work reliably, you're going to need many QR reads to work without failure or it'll fail. Like, aggregate failure rate is going to be higher than failure rate for a single QR code. I think that I'd again probably look into some kind of FEC --- I don't know if PAR2 can generate chunks small enough to be individually stored for a QR code, but if it can, maybe use one of those chunks for each QR code instead of the output of
split. That way, you only need N% of the QR frames to be successfully read.searches
Hmm. Setting aside minimum chunk size, PAR2 may not support enough chunks for your use case --- only 32k. I don't know how large the files are that you're trying to encode.
The project is supposed to convert files to QR code videos and back.
I don't really understand what you're trying to do.
I don't think that you're trying to just encode an URL, from a glance.
If you want to encode a video file as a QR code, you're going to face the pretty fundamental limitation of information content.
A QR code can store a maximum of (checks) under 3 KiB. Virtually any video file cannot fit in those space constraints.
I am not a coder. I have been staring at a screen the past two weeks trying to "vibe code" for the first time with unpaid chat bots, for a seemingly simple project. But I still haven't even gotten a single version to the real-world testing stage, keep getting failures on more basic self-tests.
So, chatbots in 2026 are not really a drop-in replacement for a computer programmer. My guess is that while we'll probably get there, it's probably going to require something more elaborate than just an plain old LLM. Like, it's not going to be a minor refinement of what's currently there, but a pretty fundamentally different system (though that system might potentially incorporate an LLM).
EDIT: Ah, it's a series of QR codes. I mean, that's going to be a pretty huge number for any real-world video.
EDIT2: Oh, you want a video of QR codes from a file. I think that a problem that you're gonna hit there is the transport, because your video is gonna be playing at a constant rate and real-time QR code recognition isn't perfectly reliable, and you're probably not going to reliably capture every frame. Maybe someone could make something with FEC so that dropping a certain percentage of frames is viable, like, use PAR2 or something.
Also, assuming that you're trying to make something that runs automatically, the generated code has stuff that will bail out if used other than if run interactively.
EDIT3: Also, it sounds like you want something portable. The script itself may (or may not be) portable, but it is trying to run external tools that are not going to be guaranteed to be present wherever.
EDIT4: I don't know why you'd be running dash on denuvan, as it sounds like its default shell is bash, but if /bin/sh is a symlink to dash on that system, what you could try doing is generating a bash-specific version. It...might work if you just switch the shebang line to bash at the top of the file, but bash in sh compatibility mode is not identical to bash in bash mode.
If you want some sort of generic portability debugging tool, I'd add
set -xas the second line of the file. That will enable trace mode. Every line that runs will be printed to stderr. Then run it like so:$ yourscript.sh 2>debug1.logThat'll output every line being run. Run it on both systems, and you'll get a log on each. Then you can run:
$ diff -u debug1.log debug2.log|lessThat'll show you where the behavior starts to differ on the two systems.
But...I'm going to be blunt. I think that you're asking more of current AI chatbots than is reasonable given their current state, and that it's going to wind up being pretty frustrating if you're aiming to do it with zero programming.
Weirdly enough, I got a long blocklist of communities in languages I don’t understand, mostly German, those often showed up while I browsed [all].
You can exclude German in your language preferences.
Meta's you kind of expect. They're cranking down R&D on VR and up R&D on AI in their research wing, and while maybe some people have enough overlap in skillset to retain, a lot are going to be specialized.
I'd also add that I think that's probably a good move. They'd caught a lot of flak for a long time over the potential returns on VR being limited, and by this point, they've lost a lot of money on it. I don't think that there's a clear path to a point where their Metaverse stuff takes off.
No, as there's customary international law protecting vessels in international waters.
Cables in international waters have only weak legal protection from an elderly treaty (and most countries are not party to that treaty).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Submarine_Telegraph_Cables
The Convention for the Protection of Submarine Telegraph Cables is a multilateral treaty that was signed in 1884 in order to protect submarine communications cables that had begun to be laid in the 19th century.
Parties: 36 (as of 2013)
Pipelines in international waters don't even have that.
Countries kind of started building out submarine infrastructure without a legal basis for protecting it.
Now, in practice, if someone decides to openly sail a ship through the Baltic Sea, North Sea, English Channel, and Mediterranean Sea while dragging a cable cutter, I'd say that it's pretty good odds that it's gonna be stopped on some pretext and that various countries involved are going to have ways of making their displeasure known. But from a legal standpoint, not a lot of levers.
I'm also a little annoyed by the fact that people use "algorithm" to refer to a "recommendation system" for social media. "Recommendation system" is really the term that one should use, and on top of that, one should really say that the system as a whole is using a heuristic to come up with the best-possible content rather than an algorithm.
...and looking at the Wikipedia page for "algorithm", apparently they even explicitly point this out:
In contrast, a heuristic is an approach to solving problems without well-defined correct or optimal results.[3] For example, although social media recommender systems are commonly called "algorithms", they actually rely on heuristics as there is no truly "correct" recommendation.
It's probably not going away, since it's entered popular usage, but it really isn't a correct use of the computer science terminology.
It's kinda like someone decided to start calling the cylinders in a car's engine "the metal thing"...which they are, but are far from the only "metal thing" in a car. Then they accidentally messed up the classification and called it "the plastic thing". I mean, yeah, I get what people mean from context, same way an auto mechanic could interpret "the plastic thing" to mean "the cylinders", but it kind of gnaws at my soul every time I see it.
Threadiverse instances aren't really rigged up for hosting video. Some will handle certain formats of video files, but the size is normally limited, and IIRC they don't guarantee that they'll retain the video for an extended period of time. I guess that one could link to externally-hosted ones.
I'd kind of suggest that PeerTube is really more oriented towards video posting.
https://peertube.fediverse.observer/
I guess someone could post to a PeerTube instance and then submit their posted video to the Threadiverse for discussion or something.
Looks like it's probably Portugal. Apparently that gold stripe on the license plate was a thing up until 2020.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_registration_plates_of_Portugal
Either way, when you’ve paid $70 for a game, the idea that you then are still going to be bombarded by commercials as you play is pretty damned galling
Oh, I'd say that it pretty much tracks the sports experience that it's trying to simulate.
searches
https://qz.com/150577/an-average-nfl-game-more-than-100-commercials-and-just-11-minutes-of-play
An average NFL game: more than 100 commercials and just 11 minutes of play
I do agree that it's full of cultural references and that lacking it would probably detract from it, but even so, I just don't see how someone having that context makes the jokes funny.
One example I had in mind was when I brought up the fact that I just didn't really find the jokes funny even through some people really did laugh. At the time, the show was showing some robots trying to pack boxes and they kept failing, because when they put them together, they'd eliminate them, in an allusion to Tetris. That is, indeed, a Gen-X reference. The guy I was watching it with was chortling. I remember asking him about it and him saying "it's hilarious!"
I mean...I get the reference there. I've owned a couple versions of Tetris. I played it back when the game was young. But...even having the cultural context, it's just...there's none of the stuff that make something funny for me there. I just look at it and say "yeah, they're alluding to Tetris." Maybe it's that there's not enough buildup or something.
I remember some episode when a bunch of hippies are protesting outside Professor Farnsworth's house. The Professor tells them to get off his property. A hippie says "You can't own property, man!" The Professor says, "You can't, because you're a penniless hippie!" I mean...I'm not offended by it poking fun at communism, but...I see the political conflict there, but it just doesn't make me laugh. Or the Dr. Zoidberg humor, which in significant part is him acting inappropriately...I dunno. It's hard to figure out precisely what makes humor work for people --- if we did, we could probably produce it a lot more mechanically --- but whatever the writing team did just...consistently didn't tickle it for me.