This article is doing comparisons with the same subjects and lighting…

No.

The site IS the one calculated score and calming marketing. I am not sure what you are referring:

- the studio photos are not provided

- those seemingly same images have slightly different angle what is actually a huge difference, AND only for 2-3 phones, not for all

PS: e.g. different clouds on the portrait example: huge dynamic difference

I… guess? I'm not sure why this was posted. None of these changes seem important.

A lot - title could probably use editing. The language has no heap, only stack memory, so the only deallocation is returning from a call stack frame.

How big is the stack? Too often large data will blow the top and destroy adjacent stacks in multi-thread environments. Are memory barrier fences used to check against overflow?

I think it is supposed to be stacks in the general sense of the data structure, not the literal `sp` register. I imagine they could be arbitrarily sized up to physical limits if you do some mmap magic. I'm still a bit fuzzy about how you could make useful programs with that, but it seems interesting.

Stack allocations will be lost when the enclosing call exits.

How does this help for long term values ?

> Everything looks like a problem solvable by reduce. (I'm often wrong on that, but I quite enjoy learning why by trying).

I agree, but I think that’s kind of the objection. It can be tempting to write your code as little brainteasers but…

I’m not a fan of this kind of “fancy” optimization anyway.

It’s too fragile. I may make some innocuous change, now the compiler cannot recognize the pattern and performance falls off the cliff.

I’d rather have the reliabile performance than the absolute fastest possible result. Then if there’s an issue I can catch and fix it reliably with profiling, not deal with a heisenbug based on whether the compiler can match the pattern.

That's true enough, but I don't think the conclusion is "don't regulate".

Try it, iterate, figure it out. It'll be painful but so be it.

I think the big difference here is that it's opt-in, off by default, and also not included with shared images by default.

This is a feature because you use it when you WANT to be able to demonstrate an image wasn't altered / was yours, like for a journalist.

This is an actual question, not a dig: what do you mean by non-removable?

You want there to be separate lines for "how long do you want your stems"?

Looking forward to your 18 SKU product matrix of decisions people have to make that they don't know what answer to choose.

The materials cost between those buns is practically nothing. OP is reaching.

I don't know. AI are basically trained to tell you what you want to hear, including when they're disagreeing with you. If you come off of your conversation with AI with a stronger belief than when you went in, is that merited?

"AI Advice Suppresses People’s Willingness To Say “I Don’t Know”, Even When The Advice Is Wrong And Accuracy Is Incentivized" https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/5y6m4_v1

Yeah you have to frame the prompt as if you've come across some potentially extremist view you want to know more about, and pretend you're an outsider needing advice. Then you bias it to favor what you really want to know.