IvanK_net

I think the screen resolution is also fingerprintable. That is why a browser should resize your window to a random size each time you visit a website.

Instead of "AI cannot" you should always say "current AI cannot".

Were you able to make it work? It never works in my case.

"sixty thousand tonnes of CO2-equivalent emissions" ? Is that what 0.0000001% of the worlds population produces in one day?

I am just saying that the colorization was needed in 1995, when 90% of people had black-and-white childhood photos.

But today, only 1% of people has black-and-white childhood photos. I just makes me want to argue when people pretend that it is still needed as much as in 1995 :D

I was also arguing with my friends about buying laptops with an optical drive ten years ago :D

That is not a tiny screen, it has over 7 thousand pixels.

I think you will not be able to read 5x5 pixel letters on that display (a letter would be about 1 mm tall).

Did you colorize grayscale photos of your grandmothers wedding?

Seeing that a "neat tool" exists and using that "neat tool" are two diffrent things. Google Glass was neat, too.

Grayscale cameras are not that much cheaper than color cameras. And if you decided to use a grayscale camera on purpose, you probably do not care about the color information (which would be totally "made up" by the colorizing algorithm).

Also, if there are only grayscale photos of you, you were probably born before 1900, and all your friends or your children (who might want to colorize your photo) are probably dead, too.

If you know a person who is 70 years old, they were 20 in 1975 - color photos existed back then.

Every grayscale photo of someone famous has already been colorized during the past 50 years. If there are only grayscale photos of you, you were probably born before 1900, and all your friends or your children (who might want to colorize your photo) are probably dead, too.

Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already.

It reminds me people who research "colorizing grayscale photos", which do not exist anymore either (if you want a color photo of someone you met in your life, there probably exists a color photo of that person).

They should have standardized 3 to 5 battery sizes (and their connectors, voltages, etc.), so that the same battery could be used across many different devices, which would bring down the cost even more.

In 2012, I created IvanK.js - a Javascript library with the "Flash API" for quickly remaking ActionScript 3 games into the web environment. But it required WebGL, which as not very well supported back then.

I could remake several of my flash games quickly into web.

https://lib.ivank.net/?p=demos&d=bitmaps

It should be enough to make it mandatory for banks to let people send money to each other for free, even abroad (within the EU). Then, at the shop, you can simply pay by making a bank transaction through the internet banking (which can be a phone app, a website, etc). The payment details (account number of the receiver, the amount, etc) can be transferred through NFC or a QR code.

Money would go directly bank-to-bank, nothing in the middle.

Can anybody prove that the essay and the abstract was not written by the AI, using 20 to 50 words as a prompt?

Many non-programmers think that programming languages get outdated, just like operating systems or computer hardware, or even some software (old algorithms replaced by better algorithms), and each programmer should "follow trends", since using the same programming language for 10+ years sounds wrong.

But programming languages are like Math. It is like saying "multiplying is outdated" or "the square root is outdated".

You chose to do it, so it means it was better to you than all other choices. Why would you still do it otherwise?

If your goal is to suffer as much as possible, it does not matter. You are still making choices that lead you to your goal as fast as possible.

More useful is one of many ways of being better. What are you talking about?

When somebody talks like this, ready to ban social networks, videogames, pornography, the whole internet, and pretty much every freedom that billinons of people enjoy, by comparing it to drugs, it scares me quite a lot.

When somebody talks like this, ready to ban social networks, videogames, pornography, the whole internet, and pretty much everything that billinons of people enjoy, by comparing it to gambling, it scares me quite a lot.

It makes no sense what you say. If the experience with A was really worse than with B, people would stay with B.

You choose to spend your time on a place A instead of the place B, it means that the place A is better than the place B. Why else would you do it, if B was better? It is a simple logic.

Internet is amazing, it is the best invention of humanity, and each year, a person spends more time on the internet (on average) than a year before, which shows that it is getting more and more useful for everyone.

Those who enjoy saying "I do not learn enough, I do not improve myself enough, I do not work hard enough" (but you say "the humanity" instead of "I"), that is just your own fault. Let people use the internet the way they want to use it.

It reminded me this demo that I made in 2012 (computed in real time by Javascript on the CPU) https://polyk.ivank.net/?p=demos&d=raycast

Maybe they could simply make a modern web browser for PS2, where you would simply open a website with the game :)

BTW. I am the author of https://www.photopea.com , which is the only software that can open Fireworks files today :D If you have any files, try to open theim (it runs instantly in your browser).

https://community.adobe.com/t5/fireworks-discussions/open-fi...

Macromedia did this when saving Fireworks files into PNG.

Also, Adobe saves AI files into a PDF (every AI file is a PDF file), and Photoshop can save PSD files into TIFF files (people wonder why these TIFFs have several layers in Photoshop, but just one layer in all other software).

Oh okay, that was my second guess.

A single tape machine is still a multi tape machine, only with one tape.

I am confused. If a single-tape turing machine receives a digit N in binary, and is supposed to write N ones on the tape, on the right side of the digit N, it performs N steps.

If you expect N ones at the output, how can this machine be simulated in the space smaller than N?

This machine must decrement the digit N at the beginning of the tape, and move to the end of the tape to write "1", so it runs in time O(N^2), not O(N)? (as it takes N "trips" to the end of the tape, and each "trip" takes 1, 2, 3 .. N steps)

Since turing machines can not jump to any place on a tape in constant time (like computers can), does it have any impact on real computers?

I think that 70 % of web users believe, that each website that they open can see their real name, their address, their phone number, the files on their computer, their browsing history and a lot more, and they believe that the GDPR laws are the only attempt to prevent websites from misusing (e.g. selling) all their private data.