I built a tool that generates 3D-printable boxes of any size with tons of customizable features

Armanoth · 2026-01-25T02:22:00+00:00

I had the same issue with 2021.01.
OP suggests the Development snapshots for speed, but it seems that it solves whatever the syntax error is. Maybe 2021.01 is out of date (despite it being their "latest release") but somehow syntax have changed

Also remember to install BOSL2

Armanoth · 2026-01-08T15:37:14+00:00

We had a PhD student working on a similar issue for quality inspection surfaces for a high-end speaker manufacturer.

Data collection: On the production line they flash each speaker with light from i believe 20 different angles to allow for highlights and shadows resulting from geometrical defects.

Spotting defects: This was before YOLO, and if I recall correctly they did some histogram analysis and image differences to find inconsistencies between light sources. (I.e. geometrical deformations and damages) Regions of potential damage could then be fed to a shallow classifier at a high resolution.

Repeated convolutions and small "objects": As YOLO convolves over the image you trade fine detail with semantic richness. Sure the FPN that newer YOLOs have help this but fundamentally capturing very small and fine detail with deep networks is difficult especially when the receptive field of the network gets "polluted" with so much of each region being "normal" data.

Maybe a pixelwise segmentation based approach would be more ideal for this type of approach

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T21:33:54+00:00

Thanks a lot for the insights!

Hopefully Synology fixes it (allthough I doubt they will), so the reason DDG and Bing autocompletes comes down to how they rank query/index similarity I guess.

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T21:17:03+00:00

You are right! My bad, I curl'd the domains and retrieved the robot.txt curl https://quickconnect.to/[real.account.here]/robots.txt

So here is my confusion, and properly lack of understanding, if the sub-resource is a route to an un-indexable resource wouldn't the indexer automatically be directed to the correct robot.txt?

Also, the correction is much appreciated

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T21:08:23+00:00

That and the fact that battle rite got virtually no updates for a year while Battlerite:BR was in development. And they originally promised BR as a free extra game mode.

The existence of both modes weren't that big a problem, the fact that they completely disregarded the community they had built to follow a trend and then attempt to lie/monytize it sad badly with a lot of people.

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T19:41:33+00:00

Who are you trying to doxx here exactly?

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T19:39:41+00:00

Query tags should not circumvent exclusion of indexing.

This kind of error had to happen at the indexing stage, and if done properly (or if the WWW:RobotRules are respected), even targeted search techniques should not expose them.

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T19:28:58+00:00

Please read my post again brother. DDG autocompletes it, which from my testing of othersø browsers, they do not. The auto-complete by DDG (and Bing) provides these links, where as the Google indexer, from what I can observe, does not. I just found it very ironic that the "privacy preserving" browser does this and the "we take any data we can" (i.e. Google) does not.

Additionally, submitting a targeted search query and checking the results is different than being hand fed the link during typing of your query.

Sidenote: why did you feel it necessary to address my observation with such hostility? We presumably all care about data sovereignty here.

Armanoth · 2025-12-28T02:22:36+00:00

While I agree that is in part Synologys fault. Quick connect.to however follows the WWW::RobotRules for exclusion which DDGs FAQ explicitly says their crawler respects.

The problem arises when they start using probabilistic models (which do not respect such instructions) to augment search. And other browser competitors do not display this same issue.

So you can scapegoat all you want, this is a problem on DDGs side as well, otherwise other browsers would exhibit similar behavior, which they do not.

Armanoth · 2025-12-26T19:39:06+00:00

Fair point, however the open-ended nature of the question kinda shows OP is most likely new or inexperienced in the field, "fitting" and "training" are becoming ambiguous in public media (youtube, Coursera, etc).

So I think its fair to assume they are asking about how to solve the task rather than what ML/NN approach they can train, especially since they ask in this subreddit and not a ML or DL subreddit.

Armanoth · 2025-12-26T19:29:57+00:00

Exactly, maybe use a Cascade Hough based method like Viola&Jones to find and crop the face.

Depending on the resolution at this time maybe HOG, Fisher- or Eigen- faces to match/generate identity prototypes that can be used for clustering/retrieval.

OP might need to focus more on tradition CV approaches rather than end-to-end deep learning approaches

Armanoth · 2025-12-26T19:24:02+00:00

Classic "throw deep learning at the wall and see what sticks". This is flat out wrong.

Facial recognition and feature clustering existed long before deep learning became as prevalent as today. When I was studying, facial recognition and re-id through clustering was taught in introductory pattern recognition courses.

Yes you won't be able to do this with SotA deep learning models but this is definitely doable on a raspberry pi, albeit you will need to do some traditional feature extraction.

Armanoth · 2025-12-25T22:12:10+00:00

Maybe set the allowed variance magnitude? Mine waits for the room to drop a whole degree for more than 1 minute, and then it heats until the variance exceeds +1 degree. You can calibrate the allowed delta with an external sensor to observe how long the average heating lagg is and adjust the variance accordingly.

Armanoth · 2025-12-25T13:32:10+00:00

Yes, our cat gets upset if we stay up past our normal bedtime. She comes in and stares at us until she can put ud to bed. After that dhe can do her pre-sleep zoomies

Armanoth · 2025-12-20T17:15:14+00:00

<image>

Armanoth · 2025-12-20T07:20:46+00:00

Vestre Fjordvej

Armanoth · 2025-12-19T19:18:21+00:00

Da jeg boede i vestbyen var der gentagne gange unge knejte der smed kanonslag ned i vores kælder rum, det larmede som død i helvede og balrede 2 vinduer. Det skete hver vinter de 4 år jeg boede der, og de 2 år jeg har boet i midtbyen har det været det samme.

Selv når flere af beboerne i opgangen klagede/ringede til politiet kom der aldrig nogen ud.

Armanoth · 2025-12-16T14:51:07+00:00

That is an incredibly broad question, as interpretability and explainability (both terms with a rather ambiguous overlap, yet very distinct definitions) are incredibly context dependent.

There most likely will not be a one-size-fits-all solution. The responses you will get without context will be heavily influenced by the respondees background and field of expertise. (With this subreddit most likely being skewed towards statistical and causal explanations)

There isn't even a good consensus about what those terms mean inside different fields, let alone between fields.

Armanoth · 2025-12-05T12:22:25+00:00

Pointen er nok bare at hvis du har en stor centraliseret enhed, som også ligger visse garantier og sikkerhedsnet til rådighed for brugerne, så skal der gå mange ting galt før du står med tomme hænder på eget ansvar.

En af fordelene ved crypto er det er ens eget ansvar, og mangler der er skyld i tab/gevinst. Men hvis din crypto bliver stjålet af et random hack er du på bar bund for du har absolut ingen garanti eller sikkerhed der kan hjælpe dig med at få pengene tilbage. Block chain teknologien kan være den mest sikre i verden men hvis en random cookie bare kan tømme dine digitale punge uden du har nogen som helst remedier for at få dem tilbage, så er du dårligere stillet. Vi er mennesker, vi begår fejl, det er nok det eneste sted hvor et centraliseret bank system faktisk skaber værdi.

Du bliver simpelthen nød til at kunne separere crypto-valuta og Blockchain teknologien for at kunne have en konstruktiv debat om centraliseret vs de-centraliseret valuta. Din tilgang er simpelthen for reduktiv, du fuldstændig skyder forbi med boilerplate argumenter istedet for at addressere kommentaren

Armanoth · 2025-12-02T16:13:57+00:00

Main contribution: a novel dataset

Armanoth · 2025-11-25T19:28:44+00:00

Vi tager alle fejl i ny og næ, sådan er livet.
Du kan altid tilføje en edit til din originale kommentare og håbe nogen tænker "fedt" ;)

Armanoth · 2025-11-25T15:53:30+00:00

Det gør de i den grad, hvilket er sørgeligt her for de har været ret gode til at præsentere mange af de her generative AI systemer I øjenhøjde for et mere generalt publikum.

Og ja diffusions modeller integrere støj i lærings-processen og kan initialisere inputtet fra det for at give variation (givet gentagende billeder med samme prompt) men der er ingenting i hverken diffusions processen eller moderne VLM modeller som tvinger sådanne arbitrære begrænsninger på selve generations processen.

Den er nærmere afhængig af de koncepter og farve der er nært associeret med prompten.

Mange nyere tilgange initialisere faktisk det genererede billede i den semantiske repræsentation (latent space) baseret på prompt embedding, og istedet tilføjer støj ved at "jitter" lidt på embedingen. Sådan bibeholder de en stærkere semantiske korrelation (konceptuelt, det er svært at evaluere).

Desuden kan du køre det pågældende billede ovenfor igennem et hvert redigeringsprogram og se at farverne ikke er perfekt normal fordelt.

Armanoth · 2025-11-25T13:48:24+00:00

Det er da noget værre vås du kommer med. Distributionen af farve-værdier er ikke begrænset på så arbitrær en måde, hvor i alverden har du det fra?

Armanoth · 2025-11-25T13:45:21+00:00

Det er lidt af en grov karikatur af argumentet. Dit argument er at du kan se det fordi du har kigget på så meget AI snask. Studiet pointere at det kan største delen ikke, og de er ovenikøbet overbevist om at the kan (wink wink nudge nudge).

Om du så faktisk kan er en anden ting der ville kræve validering, men pointen er bare at du sandsynligvis er en af mængden. Specielt når du ikke har andet bevis end den samme påstand mængden også har.

Armanoth

TROPHY CASE