Moore's Law roughly states that we get a doubling of speed every 2 years.
If we're 6 orders of magnitude off, then we need to double our speed 20 times (2^20 = 1,048,576), which would give us speeds approximately in line with 40 years ago. Unless my understanding is completely off.
It seems to me that it comes down to how the day of the week was picked.
If they picked a random day of the week, and there was only one boy, then there is only a 1/7 chance of a boy being born on that day.
If they have one boy, who was born on a Tuesday, and that is why they picked the day, then there is a 100% chance of a boy being born on that day, so no additional information is conferred.
It uses face-api.js to find the face, and then move the sunglasses over it. It's about a 5 meg model, so it's pretty slow to load. You can customize with a URL, or drag and drop an image on. Resizing the browser also moves the glasses around.
Very happy to see someone take the idea way way way further!
Heck yeah! Love the touches like resize handling or rotation support! Contributions are more than welcome... hint hint ;)
> It uses face-api.js to find the face
Yeah, I'm using Google AI's Face Detector [1]. There's Tensorflow's Face Landmarks Detection [2] that looked most promising and accurate. But it had two bugs [3][4] that are blockers. The first one got fixed recently, but the other one is still pending.
echo -n "To begin with, for example, and to make sure your SHA-256 hash function is working, the hash value or checksum of this sentence, from capital 'T' to concluding colon, expressed in hexadecimal, is:" | sha256sum
Not disclosing it to postfix is the biggest issue I'm seeing people talk about. From the article they reached out to three of the biggest individual vendors, but there's no indication of them disclosing it to postfix or any of the other providers of mail server software.
In the article they even mention that postfix is affected, and show it as being the most used mail server online, by a large margin.
The icon isn't the photos app icon, although the general shape is similar.
>Add details cautiously. If the content or shape is overly complex, details can be hard to discern. Icons at all three sizes should generally match in appearance, although you can explore subtle, richer, or more detailed additions at 48×48 pixel size.
I believe that example is meant to be an example of a bad icon, as it has a complex shape with lots of different textures.
> The icon isn't the photos app icon, although the general shape is similar.
are you sure? I'm holding up my iPhone side-by-side, an to me there's no doubt this is attempting to represent that. To represent the different colors, the pixel version uses a unique pattern for each "feather". It seems as 1:1 as a 48x48 pixel version could be.
https://movie.jammaloo.com/
reply