Not at all! Decorations are needed for lots of things. For example, obviously decorations are needed for decorating. Successful sexual posturing in some birds requires large, decorative body parts like feathers or crests.
In my own experience, whenever I detect something AI generated I lose the ability to evaluate how much I can "trust" something. Compare an article on Medium with a published book on the same topic; both are human-originated but the substance of one implies authority, quality etc. Generating a website and pictures with AI requires very little effort and care, and I have no interest in carelessness. Like most humans, I can't help but evaluate the author alongside the art.
Indeed, I saw the watermarks. It's clearly a testament to his skill that his consistency is so unbelievable. Maybe that's common in macro photography but I'm genuinely floored by it.
The macro photography looks bizarrely uniform and the poses contrived. I feel like a sleuth trying to decide if this is AI generated or not. I suspect it isn't, but I'm somewhat distressed at how suspicious I am of cool things now.
As someone who has done some stacked photos, they always look suspicious! If it's any consolation, I recognize the photographer and they are the sort of person who would never use AI!
You know how some photos have super blurred backgrounds? The same effect occurs undesirably when you’re trying to do extreme macro photography (close-up photos of small things). The effect would be that face might be sharp but the body would get blurrier the farther away from the focus plane.
So a workaround is to take a lot of photos with the focus plane at different depths. You sweep the focus plane through the scene, snapping a lot of photos as you go. This can be automatic with nice gear.
Then you take all of those photos and combined them digitally, with the algorithm selecting pixels from the photo with the best sharpness in that region. So the photo you see is a combination of many photos.
You take multiple pictures at different focal points and combining together computationally because the depth of field at the magnification is very shallow. The resulting image looks somewhat flat, but highly detailed.
In South Africa we refer to the papaya as pawpaw, I'm in England now, and here they just say papaya. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papaya. This article mentions papaya as a separate fruit. Is there something missing?
I find MDN to be a bit clearer, and they benefit from the in-browser runtime. All the extra detail in the Rust docs (blanket traits etc) were quite intimidating and distracting when I first started learning it.
While both of these docs are pretty good, as someone who normally much prefers API references to "how to" formats, the MDN's "how to" approach here is succinct & just enough to cover reasonable bases, while the Rust API ref list is a bit too terse by comparison (& the Read More click out is a bit annoying).
Have there been any comparisons written about Tailwind's performance vs thoughtfully selected CSS? I've been writing Tailwind exclusively for the last year or so and I haven't noticed anything in particular, but I find that using utility classes causes me to lose an awareness of the cascading nature of CSS. Aside from the filesize bloat due to the bigger HTML files, do long and highly-repetitive class lists slow down style parsing or DOM interaction? And if so, would @apply directives have an advantage over class lists?
I can't say much about selector performance besides that class selectors (.class-name) being very fast, opposed to complex selectors (like "#some-id > div a"). Of course less classes applied means less work for the browser, but the real cost is the complex selectors
With regards to bloated HTML, that might seem the case but since you reuse the same class-names everywhere in your app (and tailwind JIT removes non-used classes), compression really cuts down on the size of your bundles. It just looks bloated in the web inspector. This is a disadvantage, it is a bit hard to debug HTML with all those class-name strings around, although I would say web-inspectors should just truncate "class" attr value
With bundler performance it adds some overhead (tailwind has to go through all your .js/tsx files), but in my experience not noticeable
reply