Twitter refugee (but I'm used to it from Tumblr)
・Blass: Rhymes with Ace
・28
・male (he/him)
・Maned wolf in a skin suit
・Live in the Bay area, California, USA.
| Pronouns | He/Him (they/them is also always fine!) |
| Find me! | https://blass-ros3.carrd.co |

Twitter refugee (but I'm used to it from Tumblr)
・Blass: Rhymes with Ace
・28
・male (he/him)
・Maned wolf in a skin suit
・Live in the Bay area, California, USA.
| Pronouns | He/Him (they/them is also always fine!) |
| Find me! | https://blass-ros3.carrd.co |
Trying to compress an image in a lossless format for upload, and the png keeps being just 6% too large. So I think: hey, WEBP has a lossless mode, and that thing has crazy small file sizes in comparison!
Make a webp that's >30% smaller aaaand...
The website has a 60% smaller size limit for webp.
(and yes, I tried pngcrush and 8-bit colors and palletizing, so I might just suffer with one page having compression artifacts)
Was trying to figure out how to back up a folder I have regularly to my NAS. Unfortunately, it's full of thousands of tiny files, so despite the whole thing only being ~15GB, it takes about 6 hours to transfer all the files.
SO: why not zip it up first? Save some space on the NAS and it'll transfer quicker over the network, zipping it only takes about 20 minutes, and that can be even faster if I use -update!
But no, powershell (which I use for the backup script) relies on an older API that can't zip files larger than 2GB. And there's a single DB file in there that accounts for 2.5GB.
So I'm just rewriting it to use winrar, which is nicely more verbose about what it's doing, compresses it in about 12 minutes, and then transfers to my NAS in another 2! (which is faster than writing the archive directly to the NAS, funnily enough)
Most boosted post: 1 boost.
Hot take:
Discord is not a documentation platform. It is a chat platform. If your project requires connecting to a discord to obtain necessary information, then your project is undocumented.
I've been hearing that Bing is doing a better job than google recently, and honestly, I've been trying it when google fails, and I gotta say... People are correct.
Just now I was searching up the thumbnail of an image I had. I knew the full res was SOMEWHERE but couldn't find it. Google just told me that it thought it was a picture of a fictional character, and then searched "fictional character" for me. (also it had a link to the video it was from on the second page, but not the image I wanted)
Bing I gave it the image, Identified the characters, series, and a bunch of similar images (plus a bunch of suggested searches, but IDC), including the image I wanted. A link to where it was from, direct links to the image, the max res, and the creator's name.
Just... WOW. Legitimately stunned how much better it is. And I wouldn't have noticed if google hadn't ACTIVELY MADE THEIR PRODUCT WORSE. It worked FINE before.
It's fun looking up a video and seeing them talking about the generation of GPU mine is from... and then seeing the video is a decade old >.>
I got a top-of-the-line card back in 2015! it's still surprisingly competent!
But... I know I need to upgrade at some point.
But now comparable GPUs are starting at $1100.
And there's no more like "high end but not insane". The tier that's $400 has the same VRAM as I have now, which is what I'm usually running out of.
The next tier up is... $1100.