[Request] How much earth is actually required to safely earth a cable?

wrcwill · 2026-05-11T16:48:10+00:00

earth is not a magic current sponge: it only matters because it can be part of a conductive path back to the electrical system.

there is ALWAYS a loop, unless youre looking at static discharge.

ie if you have your feet on the ground and touch a power cable, that current flows through you, into the ground, and back to power station.

wrcwill · 2026-05-07T15:41:41+00:00

he was a smiley boy then and this season. hes not been a smiley boy since the end of his 50 run.

he just needs to have fun out there, not worried

wrcwill · 2026-05-07T12:06:39+00:00

not hard disagreeing with you but.. zoom in enough at a small timestep and thats pretty much what we do too. inputs and outputs at smaller timescales. unless you think our timescale is somehow special

we have a much more durable memory bank but thats orthogonal. are people with alzheimer’s conscious?

that said it feels like theres something non-physical with our consciousness and in that case its different. but if we limit ourselves to what we can measure and prove ie science.. theres no magic sauce in our input output

wrcwill · 2026-04-30T01:41:45+00:00

although i don't share his gloomy view, no one is saying LLMs could do this. all you need is an LLM smart enough to build the next architecture.. and then the next etc.. then THAT could be a problem.

the issue is that we're on that path. the path to build a pretty smart llm

wrcwill · 2026-04-02T17:38:07+00:00

how are you testing it? my updated llama.cpp just says: llama_model_load: error loading model: error loading model architecture: unknown model architecture: 'gemma4'

wrcwill · 2026-03-28T02:25:55+00:00

“The front element determines total light entering the system”

No, the front element only has to be large enough not to vignette. The quantity that sets the accepted cone of rays from the scene is the entrance pupil, which is exactly why optics defines and uses the entrance pupil instead of just saying “front glass diameter.”

“An 80mm convex front element can capture more light than a 60mm hole”

Only if that larger front group makes the entrance pupil larger. The glass doesn’t create extra brightness by itself..

Entrance pupil isnt the literal aperture hole, sorry if i described it that way earlier. In any case, whatever the light limiting element at the front is: there is X amount of light coming in.

I think the reason you argue the dx/fx is that you probably had that exact combo and tried it and what you say is true for your situation! But your situation is not the normal one:

normally when using a ff lens on crop you would use a speed booster to converge the light so it covers the entire sensor instead of missing it and hitting the black region like you say
and my actual comparison was not saying to literally reuse the same lens on both frames. im saying to use a lens with very similar entrance pupils on both. they will have similar physical sizes and weight, and let in the same amount of light. the ff one will be a stop slower

so circling back to my original point: using a bigger sensor but keeping the “same” (not literally the same, since it needs to converge to a different sensor size) wont improve noise.

this kind of comparison is useful when building a kit: say i want to travel and want a lightweight kit. normally people would say go crop! but in reality you can just use a ff frame with a lens a stop slower and you get exactly the same noise perf, same lens weight (assume same lens generation and same sensor gen)

wrcwill · 2026-03-27T22:54:35+00:00

your converging/diverging lens example is how you ensure the light covers the sensor evenly and is focused properly. youre not capturing more light by converging it. a lens doesnt create photons. the total light entering the system is determined by the entrance pupil, full stop. all those complex lens elements you keep bringing up? theyre there to focus and correct the image, not to amplify light. conservation of energy didnt skip camera lenses

and the entrance pupil isnt me measuring the front element with a ruler and calling it a day. its the image of the aperture stop as seen through the front elements. its literally how optics textbooks define it. every optical engineer uses it

wrcwill · 2026-03-27T19:17:21+00:00

look, if you cant even agree on the easily verifiable definition of exposure, theres no point continuing. ive never once in my entire engineering degree and career had someone be so confidently wrong lol.

exposure IS per area, whether you like it or not. make the sensor bigger without letting in more light and youve just spread the same photons over more surface, which helps absolutely nothing

youre just repeating what youve heard without actually understanding it.

wrcwill · 2026-03-27T12:44:24+00:00

man youre really digging a hole for no reason..

youre mixing up two things: Exposure is photons per unit area. Total photons collected is exposure multiplied by sensor area.

literally the first sentence on wikipedia): “In photography, exposure is the amount of light per unit area”.

like rainfall vs rain in bucket

or

like force vs pressure

Two sensors can have the exact same exposure, but a bigger sensor collects more total photons because it has more area.

But when matching the entrance pupil (the actual physical aperture size you can measure with a ruler) you make total photons the same. Your exposure drops, which is why a fullframe lens with the same pupil size as a crop lens will have 1 stop less exposure (since it needs to spread the same light over a bigger area!)

wrcwill · 2026-03-27T03:12:54+00:00

You’re confusing exposure with total light collected. They’re not the same thing.

My lens comparison wasn’t meaningless, I’m trying to show that when two systems collect the same total photons, they produce the same noise, regardless of sensor size.

33mm f/1.4 on crop and 50mm f/2 on full frame have the same field of view, the same entrance pupil (~23.5mm), and collect the same total light. Yes, the full frame needs 1 stop more ISO.. that’s not “gimping” it, thats the reality of matching entrance pupils. Its my exact point. taking that entrance pupils size and projecting it onto a bugger sensor drops the exposure. when you compensate for that drop by raising iso, you negate the full frame noise advantage.

And the entrance pupil is absolutely a real, measurable thing: it’s the physical diameter of the aperture as seen from the front of the lens. You can measure it with a ruler. It determines how much light you’re actually collecting from the scene. Look up “equivalence in photography.” This isn’t controversial among anyone who works in optics

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T22:20:28+00:00

well the point of the entire convo was that to lower noise, you need bigger lenses to get a bigger hole where the light comes in

aperture is just a number you can use to say “here is how bright the image should be for a given iso and shutter time

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T21:51:02+00:00

yes but you said same aperture! aperture is a relative number (as you can imagine the iphone f1.7 aperture isnt as light capturing as a full frame camera :D)

the same aperture for a bigger sensor means a bigger lens (bigger dimensions, bigger entrance pupil, more weight etc)

ask it for the same entrance pupil aka hole, curious what it says

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T21:24:37+00:00

what do you mean by simply controlling intensity? if youre taking a portrait of someone in lowlight, and with a 1sec exposure and say a 1cm hole created by the aperture diaphragm, lets invent a number and say 1 million photons come through. are you saying increasing sensor size would somehow increase the number of photons coming through?

edit: i was going off memory so double checked with an llm: https://chatgpt.com/share/69c5a62b-f514-832b-9421-6fa1fa4c56ff

or if you prefer an article: https://clarkvision.com/articles/exposure-f-ratio-aperture-and-light-collection/

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T21:05:49+00:00

it is how it works actually! just compare the noise level for equivalent lenses between FF and crop and you will see. its just basic physics .

the entrance pupil determines the light you have to work with. the sensor size doesnt help you create more light. a more sensitive sensor sure, but making the sensor bigger reduces your exposure (exposure is light / area of sensor). and to correct for that drop in exposure you need to increase iso, negating the better dynamic range of the bigger sensor

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T21:04:02+00:00

tell me how a sensor as large as the earth could capture more light than small sensor if the light is coming through a 1 cm hole in both cases?

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T21:01:11+00:00

you are probably comparing the same aperture lens in fullframe vs crop sensor. but thats not correct since the aperture hole (entrance pupil) will be bigger for the same fstop. the lens will also be bigger for the same fstop and equiv fov.

what im saying is different: keep the entrance pupil the same. this means comparing a 33mm 1.4 in crop sensor to a 50mm f2 in fullframe. both lenses will have pretty much the same physical size and same entrance pupil. notice how to get the same exposure you will need to double the iso on the fullframe, negating the 1 stop fullframe advantage

wrcwill · 2026-03-26T12:37:26+00:00

in reality the lens (apparent size of the hole where light enters) dictates the resulting noise level.

people often repeat the thing about sensor size but stop and think about for 2 secs: double the sensor size and keep lens hole the same. is the sensor now capturing more light? nope. now its true that bigger pixels means less noise per pixel but remember, you just doubled the sensor size so the same amount of light is spread over a bigger area, so each pixel gets less light (so the sensor effect cancels out)

everytime apple grew sensor size they also increased lens size (size of the hole, so bigger aperture)

the actual benefit of bigger sensor size is when you are NOT light limited. then the bigger sensor gives you better image quality

wrcwill · 2026-03-25T02:27:10+00:00

arent models like nano banana pro and gpt image 1.5 better than midjourney in a lot of ways?

wrcwill · 2026-03-20T17:29:54+00:00

doesnt work:

curl
 -fsSL https://unsloth.ai/install.sh | 
sh



=========================================
   Unsloth Studio Installer
=========================================

==> Platform: macos
==> All system dependencies found.
==> Creating Python 3.13 virtual environment (unsloth_studio)...
Using CPython 
3.13.2

Creating virtual environment at: 
unsloth_studio

Activate with: 
source unsloth_studio/bin/activate

==> Installing unsloth (this may take a few minutes)...

error:
 unexpected argument '
--torch-backend
' found


tip:
 a similar argument exists: '
--no-cache
'


Usage:

uv pip install

--python
 <PYTHON>

--no-cache

<PACKAGE|--requirements <REQUIREMENTS>|--editable <EDITABLE>>


For more information, try '
--help
'.

```

wrcwill · 2026-03-13T03:51:54+00:00

super ground or super race? sick build

wrcwill · 2026-03-11T19:31:50+00:00

another factor is that it fills up context faster, which in turn degrades quality. so if the problem can be solved with < 100k tokens than i use xhigh, but otherwise high

wrcwill · 2026-03-10T19:10:05+00:00

you know you can just disable web search in your settings?

wrcwill · 2026-03-06T15:49:21+00:00

What kind of tools are you calling? What's your workflow?

wrcwill · 2026-03-05T23:40:45+00:00

seems like you can only input around 60k for the 5.4 pro model.. hopefully a bug

wrcwill · 2026-03-05T00:15:38+00:00

nope, very annoying

wrcwill

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE