16
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2026
16 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
43143 readers
439 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
Ah yes, another armchair expert who clearly knows more than the researchers at Nanjing University and the editors of Nature Sensors.
Power constraints are not a concern. Drones and satellites just have unlimited batteries, right? They definitely don't need to shave off every milliwatt possible.
Hybrid CV systems are already perfect. Why would anyone bother innovating when we can just keep moving massive amounts of redundant data through multiple conversion stages? It's not like that burns energy or anything.
But sure, your armchair analysis definitely outweighs peer reviewed research from an international team that built a working prototype with molybdenum disulfide phototransistors.
They probably just forgot to Google 'hybrid CV' before publishing.
.... You feeling okay? It's really dumb to be crashing out this hard over popsci reporting. Maybe go give the actual paper a read? It doesn't answer my criticisms, hence presenting them here, but at least we'll have a common basis on which to discuss my criticism of the research.
(well... they did offer me a job, so I suppose they must see something of value in my work? It was pretty far outside my field though. And, honestly, they're just shotgunning out offers to any researchers that publish)
Sounds like one of use is definitely crashing out. Is google blocked at the troll farm?
I ...what? "No u" is really the best you could think up? I get the feeling you're not here in good faith; this seems like it might not be a conversation with much value, intellectual or entertainment.
absolutely hilarious that you think you deserve some sophisticated response here, and obviously this conversation has no value, you have absolutely nothing of substance to say, run along and do your trolling elsewhere
Implying I expect sophistication is a tad optimistic, but I suppose I'm not so heartless as to deny you your vices.
Chores aside though, why are we doing this? I made some good points about the technology, and it's clear from further reading that the usual has happened with popsci reporting. I really recommend you read the source paper - it does an excellent job of explaining exactly the points I raised initially and why the scope was restricted so sharply.
Really, if you don't want an informed opinion and you show open and naked contempt for "armchair experts" (because obviously a layperson could never gain knowledge without the hierarchy of academia), why are you sharing it at all? If it's just to aggregate links and pick fights, Reddit is right over there; and they'd love another passionate user of your caliber.
Awww, it's adorable that you think you made good points. And being actually informed is precisely how I can spot trolls like you. Not really sure why you keep replying. You're not going to convince me to have any respect for you by continuing to double down here.
I like a good pointless slapfight as much as the next lemming, but I suspect the mods don't share my enthusiasm. And while I sincerely appreciate your bold confidence, you should reign it in a little - it's a pitiful hope to cling to that I'd do this to win your respect, or really for any other reason besides a sincere interest in the subject matter (which you've made clear we do not share) and an admitted curiosity about why you've started this with such open hostility.
Sincerely, if you'd like to know more about this subject I'd be happy to discuss it! It's really a very interesting developing field of study, if you enjoy that sort of intellectual diversion. ANN-first design, while obviously open to exploitation by the douchebag class, has had some very promising results slip through the cracks of unrepentant capitalism.
Thank you for your dedication to providing such an excellent illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect. If you'd like to actually learn about the subject then go read the paper, perhaps even you have the capacity to learn. Although, given this discussion I have doubts. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44460-026-00122-3
Yes, DK can be a deeply odd thing to have pointed out - god knows I've struggled with it in my own field. But I'm glad to see you've taken my advice to heart! I also appreciate you giving me the link, but I did already read it; when I've been saying things like "I really recommend you read the source paper" and "Maybe go give the actual paper a read?", the "paper" I've been referring to has indeed been that paper. The paper published in nature. The paper chosen specially to kill Kuzco. Kuzco's paper.
Your dedication to the clown act is truly admirable.
Such harsh sentiments you fling... But, look here; watch the arc they describe, can you see it? Yes, it's clear - they've begun to fall flatly, what sting they once had now rounded and dull. And observe, where they lay exhausted? Their vitriol is spent from long overuse! Oh, if only your rhetorical broadsides had some variation, then these poor little sentiments might be afforded some rest... but, ah, it is not to be. Truly, you can stand tall amongst your peers, proud in the knowledge that such a mercy is beyond your care, even perhaps your capacity, to grant. Thus the sentiments line up again, belabored on all sides by your marshals as they shamble, fated to attend again and again their sisyphean taskmaster.
I love how you just keep tilting there.
Oh, I'm far to timid to slay dragons, m'lord - I leave that to you and your proud steed! And with your stout lance in hand, once again I bid you good luck in your quest. I myself, why, I'm content with my lot. No hero, me - not like yourself. No, I'll content myself with dunking on you repeatedly, to the point that it's starting to get embarrassing.
oh no, I made the bot glitch, ah well was fun while it lasted
Lol wait time out - did you not mean to make a don quixote joke there? I thought it was a pretty clever counterpart to the whole "sisyphean task" thing so I figured it was safe to borrow from the adventures, casting myself as the ploughman and you as Quixote... sorta an evening out of the tragic comedy, as it were.