I found a 350€ OralB toothbrush in a shop recently in France.

I couldn’t believe the amount of bullshit you have to cram in to up a toothbrush to that level of price.

Pic :

It’s AI.

People really despise AI over here. No matter the context.

With the constant stream of news I would suppose it’s handy to have some virtual anchor available 24/24 and that you can start in a matter of minutes.

It’s cynical of course but I kind of get the idea.

I understand that. It’s the downvoting of the clearly marked as AI LLM response. Is it detrimental to the conversation here to have that? Is it better to share nothing rather than this LLM output?

Was this thread better without it?

Is complete ignorance of the PNG compatibility preferable to reading this AI output and pondering how true is it?

[list 200 links]

Now I think this conversation is getting just rude for no reason. I think the AI output was definitely not the “I’m lucky” result of a Google search and the fact that you choose that metaphor is in bad faith.

If you prefer to know nothing about PNG compatibility rather than something that might be true about PNG. That’s fine but definitely not my approach.

Also, as I said to another commenter. Critical thinking is not some tool you decide to use on some comments and not others. An AI answer on some topics is actually more likely to be correct than an answer by a human being. And it’s not some stuff I was told by an AI guru it’s what researchers are evaluating in many universities. Ask an human to complete various tasks and then ask the AI model and compare scientifically the data. And it turns out there is task where the AI outperforms the human pretty much all the time.

YET on this particular task the assumption is that it’s bullshit and it’s just downvoted. Now I would have posted the same data myself and for some reason I would not see a single downvote. The same data represented differently completely change the likelihood of it being accurate. Even though at the end of the day you shouldn’t trust blindly neither a comment from an human or an AI output.

Honestly, I’m saddened to see people already rejecting completely the technology instead of trying to understand what it’s good at and what it’s bad at and most importantly experiencing it themselves.

I wanted to know what was generative AI worth so I read about it and tried it locally with open source software. Now I know how to spot images that are AI generated, I know what’s difficult for this tech and what is not. I think that’s a much healthier attitude than blindly rejecting any and all AI outputs.

I did check some of the references.

What I dont understand is why you would perceive this content as more trustworthy if I didn’t say it’s AI.

Nobody should trust blindly some anonymous comment on a forum. I have to check what the AI blurbs out but you can just gobble the comment of some stranger without exercising yourself some critical thinking?

As long as I’m transparent on the source and especially since I did check some of it to be sure it’s not some kind of hallucination…

There shouldn’t be any difference of trust between some random comment on a social network and what some AI model thinks on a subject.

Also it’s not like this is some important topic with societal implications. It’s just a technical question that I had (and still doesn’t) that doesn’t mandate researching. None of my work depends on that lib. So before my comment there was no information on compatibility. Now there is but you have to look at it critically and decide if you want to verify or trust it.

That’s why I regret this kind of stubborn downvoting where people just assume the worse instead of checking the actual data.

Sometime I really wonder if I’m the only one supposed to check my data? Aren’t everybody here capable of verifying the AI output if they think it’s worth the time and effort?

Basically, downvoting here is choosing “no information” rather than “information I have to verify because it’s AI generated”.

Edit: Also I could have just summarized the AI output myself and not mention AI. What then? Would you have checked the accuracy of that data? Critical thinking is not something you use “sometimes” or just “on some comments”.

To be clear… If you have already signed, thank you but do not sign again.

(I know that’s not what you wanted to say, I just want to make sure it’s not misunderstood).

As you can see it’s irrelevant apparently. If it’s AI generated it will be downvoted.

I’m probably gonna be massively downvoted for saying the forbidden word but I asked AI to do a summary with references of the forward and backward compatibility of PNG’s new version:

!

Based on recent search results, the new PNG specification (Third Edition) and its reference library (libpng) maintain strong backward compatibility while introducing modern features. Here’s a detailed compatibility analysis:

🔄 1. Backward Compatibility (Viewing Old PNGs with New Lib)

• Full Support: The new libpng (1.6.49+) and PNG Third Edition fully support legacy PNG files. Existing PNGs (conforming to the 2003/2004 spec) will render correctly without changes .
• Implementation Stability: Libpng’s API evolution (e.g., hiding png_struct/png_info internals since 1.5.0) ensures older apps using png_get_*/png_set_* functions remain compatible. Direct struct access, deprecated since 1.4.x, may break in libpng 2.0.x (C99-only) .
• Security Enhancements: Critical vulnerabilities (e.g., CVE-2019-7317 in png_image_free()) were patched in libpng 1.6.37+, making the new lib safer for decoding old files .

⚠️ 2. Forward Compatibility (Viewing New PNGs with Old Lib)

• Basic Support: Older libpng versions (pre-1.6.37) can decode new PNGs if they avoid new features. Core chunks like IHDR or IDAT remain unchanged .
• New Feature Limitations:
  • HDR Imagery: Requires libpng 1.6.45+ and apps supporting the mDCv chunk. Older libs ignore HDR data, falling back to SDR, which may cause color inaccuracies .
  • APNG Animation: Officially standardized in PNG Third Edition. Older libs (e.g., <1.6) treat APNG as static images, showing only the first frame .
  • EXIF Metadata: New eXIf chunks are ignored by legacy decoders, losing metadata like GPS or copyright info .
• Security Risks: Older libs (e.g., ≤1.6.36) contain unpatched vulnerabilities (e.g., CVE-2015-8126). Parsing malicious new PNGs could exploit these flaws .

📊 Compatibility Summary

🔧 3. Implementation and Industry Adoption

• Broad Support: Major browsers (Chrome, Safari, Firefox), OSs (iOS, macOS), and tools (Photoshop, DaVinci Resolve) already support the new spec .
• Progressive Enhancement: New features like HDR use optional chunks, ensuring graceful degradation in older software .
• Future-Proofing: Work on PNG Fourth Edition (HDR/SDR interoperability) and Fifth Edition (better compression) is underway .

💎 Conclusion

• Upgrade Recommended: New libpng (1.6.49+) ensures security and full compatibility with legacy files.
• Test Workflows: Verify critical tools handle new features (e.g., APNG animation in browsers).
• Fallbacks for Old Systems: For environments stuck with outdated libs, convert new PNGs to legacy format (e.g., strip HDR/APNG) .

For developers: Use png_get_valid(png_ptr, info_ptr, PNG_INFO_mDCv) to check HDR support and provide fallbacks .

!<

I have signed the petition but wasn’t ever asked for an ID.

So in countries like mine (FR) how are they gonna check my signature?

How are those surprlus “solving world hunger”?

There is nothing really saying that in the wikipedia page. Just because a country has surplus at one point doesn’t mean it will fill the belly of someone at the other side of the world.

Sorry but this seems like a massive simplification.

24135 would result in an incomplete star…

Can’t wait for the “Insert meme” entry on knowyourmeme.

My cat just puts all the litter at the very back of the litter box. Then pees right at the entrance of the litter box. Then puts her paws thoroughly in pee and starts a nice stroll all around my flat.

I mean she is definitely smarter than other cats for certain stuffs (opening doors, drawers is easy for her) but she is really bad at using the litter box. And I have tried all types of litter and various amount of it but she almost always does that.

Roger that.

No dick pics with pavement as background.

At the same time ?

Challenge accepted.

Also Andy Yen :

https://x.com/andyyen/status/1864436449942110660

I know it’s quite irrelevant but I’m still very very cautious about proton since this comment. If at the head of the proton foundation you have a Trumpist it doesn’t bod well for the future.

CEO of proton think Trump of all things is what we need to combat the big tech. Trump, elected with a bunch of his big tech billionaires.

What a bunch of cowards.

They clearly are afraid of doing one too many fact checking and offending one of Trump’s minions.

I’m tempted to try it out as an avid Rocket League player.

I’m just not sure there is something in Rematch that I cannot already get somehow in Rocket League.

So… did it work?