Why comment if you didn't read the article? It's in the first paragraph: "Social media platforms based in the U.S. including Facebook and WhatsApp will be forced to share users’ encrypted messages with British police under a new treaty"
I suspect it has to do with the lower resolution. I'm using nearest neighbors interpolation for resizing images and have noticed similar behaviour before. Would be great if you can try with higher resolution versions(preferably > 200px) of the same images and let me know the results.
A closer inspection of the results actually shows some of the results aren't that bad a match. Results ordered 1, 4, 5, 7 and 7 in particular vaguely have the same outline as that of the query image. If I have to score this result, I wouldn't give it more than a 3 out of 10 for sure.
I just realised the "download" icons aren't meant to be "similar icons"... they allow you to download the one above. Doh!
I've re-tried the "remove user" one but uploaded an SVG instead of a PNG (so technically the resolution is unlimited). Uploaded it both circled and not circled.
:) Please feel free to share the SVGs. I will convert them to PNGs and test them out. I will add SVG support real soon. Right now I've put an exception handler that passes an empty array as query if an image format that can't be decoded is thrown at it :|
Sure - is your email [email protected]? If you don't want to post your email publicly, can you email [email protected] and I'll reply with both SVGs + PNGs.
I actually uploaded SVGs so I think you might already (unintentionally) support SVGs?
Thanks a ton for testing it quite exhaustively! Would really appreciate it if you can share the second image.
I spent a lot of time working on a hack for 'normalizing' white on black and black on white backgrounds and also between choosing adaptive vs gaussian thresholds dynamically during preprocessing.
Here is an example with white on black and black on white variations of Nike logo that works as intended.
I had the same experience recently with first-time founders on HN "Who's Hiring?" (Fat Lama). They expected 4 rounds of interviews and a tech test. Delusional.
This feels like the perfect timing for me to read this. I just quit my job on Sunday after 1.5 years of trying and failing to get on with the CEO. I'm not sure I want to stay in tech at all. I'd be interested in hearing other people's stories about changing careers entirely -- to sales (I'm not a people person but trying hard to learn the soft skills), to writing a TV show or movie (theatrics and drama are fun), to non-tech biz dev? Would love to hear people's stories and how they succeeded or failed to change career, and if they regretted it?
It's taken 8 years to realise it, but now I realise the tech startup culture is absolutely horrible and -- as they article says -- full of narcissists. If you don't realise how bad the culture is, I'd recommend introspecting a bit (wish I did this sooner).
My partner left finance to work in medicine. She makes a lot less money and likes it a lot better. I dunno where you live, but becoming a physician assistant can be a pretty good gig: much less school, pretty good salaries, pretty defined hours, very little debt.
Personally, I worked at a series of toxic startups and needed two years away to not loath programming. I regret nothing about leaving tech the first time, and after returning, my biggest regret is waiting so long to start my own company. Closely followed by tolerating so many shitty bosses. It helped me to have friends that did things besides work; workaholics are very common in sfbay. Dunno if that helps, but good luck.
> "Some of the help and therapy I eventually received was excellent, but as much as my recovery was supported by the NHS, it was also fuelled by my determination never to have to rely on it again."
When I read this line, it hit home. I've been in and out of NHS treatment for years for other (not anorexia) issues. I never ever want to rely on the NHS again. They failed me so much I now avoid having to interact with anyone in the medical field. I deliberately avoid going to my GP for anything. Mental health care in the UK is so bad that you really wouldn't believe without first-hand experience. It needs to be scrapped and started again. I don't want to rant here on Hacker News too much (almost never comment) but this hit a nerve and I'm angry just thinking about the mental health care the NHS pretends to provide.
People love comparing countries for their non-mental healthcare (physiological care?), but I never seem to hear about countries that actually have good, functioning mental healthcare systems.
New Zealand has what could be described as a well-functioning (most of the time) healthcare system, if you break your arm, it's not a worry at all. But the mental healthcare system is a complete shitshow.
It's an absolute disgrace, especially considering that NZ has the highest youth suicide rate in the world.
Perhaps it has more to do with us (i.e. humans) not having a deep understanding of mental health treatment? I mean, we really don't understand the mind very well at all.
It's not just a clinical understanding either. We culturally approach mental health differently than other health. Get cancer and everybody rushes to your aid. Have anorexia and people ask questions about why we should pay for "self-inflicted" injuries (devil's advocacy couched, but still the question is posed).
Thankfully the cultural stance is changing. It wasn't long ago that the question about "self-inflicted" injuries wouldn't have even had to be couched in devil's advocacy.
I'm a clinical psychologist in the US, and it is a complete total shitshow, a combination of stigma and bigotry from outside the system, and self-inflicted nonsense from within.
People misunderstand and have trouble thinking of mental health to begin with, so you end up with general attitudes of "people just have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps" or "just get over it," not understanding that the problem is often that people lack that ability. Other times it's just sheer lack of empathy for people who have had to deal with more difficult circumstances (or even just different circumstances). And then there's the recurring idea that behavioral sciences should just be like all the other sciences, or that it's not worth paying attention to because we don't have it all figured out like basic Newtonian physics.
On the other side, within the field it's a mess too. There should be many more professional models, for example, and a lot more to offer, but territorial battles screw it over for everyone. Psychologists, for example, shoot themselves in the foot with bullshit licensing requirements for reasons I don't understand (maybe to appear more rigorous? to keep competition from entering the field?), requirements that are even more stringent than for MDs in certain ways. There's also no reason psychologists shouldn't be able to learn to prescribe--many people enter clinical doctoral programs with as much natural sciences as premeds, and leave having all sorts of neuro-genetic-chemical-physiology coursework and research experience, often more than MDs in the area of neurobehavioral sciences per se. But psychiatrists bristle at the competition, and certain segments of psychologists want to control the field with their romanticized idea of what psychology "should be," again, for reasons I don't understand.
On top of that, there's various trends in treatment that have led to screwing clients over, to put it bluntly. I can't tell you the number of times I hear colleagues (not all, but a sold number) argue that treatment should be limited for its own sake, to prevent dependency or to encourage change. Sometimes that's true, but you wouldn't say that a cancer patient in need of treatment should have their treatment stopped just to teach them a lesson. And drugs are great for some people, but not for others, and in general, the administration of those drugs has become divorced from any kind of real monitoring of peoples' situations. Add to that the fact that many people's problems derive from the collapse of societal safety nets, which also means lack of funding for mental health services, and, well, you get the point.
Do you have a link? I can't find this.