jonathanvmv8f

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/40063668

As a Linux newbie, all I know about Arch Linux is that it is a DIY distro where you assemble the entirely of the OS by scratch. Somehow it feels like it is too easy than it needs to be, even if it is primarily meant for experienced users. I imagine it to be less like building your PC from parts bought from the market and more like building each and every component of the PC by scratch along with building the PC, which I assume to be much harder for the average consumer. It seems absurd how it is possible for a single person to incorporate the innumerable components required for functionality in a personal system that does not crash 100% of the time due to countless incompatibility errors that come with doing something like this.

I would like someone to elaborate on how it feels to 'build' a system software by yourself with Arch and how it is reasonable to actually do so in a simple language. I do have some experience in programming, mainly in webdev, so it's not like I need a baby-like explanation in how this works but it would be nice to get to know about this from someone who could understand where this confusion/curiosity is coming from.

As a Linux newbie, all I know about Arch Linux is that it is a DIY distro where you assemble the entirely of the OS by scratch. Somehow it feels like it is too easy than it needs to be, even if it is primarily meant for experienced users. I imagine it to be less like building your PC from parts bought from the market and more like building each and every component of the PC by scratch along with building the PC, which I assume to be much harder for the average consumer. It seems absurd how it is possible for a single person to incorporate the innumerable components required for functionality in a personal system that does not crash 100% of the time due to countless incompatibility errors that come with doing something like this.

I would like someone to elaborate on how it feels to 'build' a system software by yourself with Arch and how it is reasonable to actually do so in a simple language. I do have some experience in programming, mainly in webdev, so it's not like I need a baby-like explanation in how this works but it would be nice to get to know about this from someone who could understand where this confusion/curiosity is coming from.

What if I am just imagining the high pitch sound in my mind whenever I hear about or think of tinnitus just like how someone tells you to imagine a whale and you form a mental image of a whale? I don't pay attention to the noise while I'm busy doing stuff but once I think about it, it is as hard to stop noticing it similar to being told to breathe manually, and it gets very annoying after some time. Is it what tinnitus really is?

My latest personal project would look like this:

Image Source

For me, it is any city/building construction game like City Skylines, Two Point Hospital, Planet Zoo etc.

Just a shower thought. Seeing how these structures took decades to build in their times, and that too entirely with manual labour, I was wondering how long these architectural marvels would take to be built in this post modern era with the help of our technological advancements.

Imagine the world has dedicated its focus and the entirety of its resources on building just one Pyramid as quickly as possible out of the same materials and in the same location as the original ones. The medium of construction has no constraints but the end result must be indistinguishable, structure and composition wise.

I would love to hear how the process would take place in addition.

I believe lighting plays a very important part in making a scene realistic when it comes to creating one artificially, like in 3D modelling. That is why I also think the lighting of these AI generated images is the prime source of what impresses people about these images since no matter how unrealistic or distorted the subject is, the lighting makes it look like a natural part of the background. This is clearly different from photos like from poorly Photoshopped ones where the subject feels deliberately inserted into the scene from a cutout.

I am interested to understand how LLMs understand the context of the lighting when creating images. Do they make use of samples which happen to have the exact same lighting positions or do they add the lighting as an overlay instead? Also, why is it that lighting doesn't look convincing in some cases like having multiple subjects together etc.?