zlacker

>>fugled+(OP)
This is cool, as far as a practical issue though (aside from the 280gb TTF file!) is that it makes it incompatible with all other fonts; if you copy and paste your "improved" text then it will no longer say what you thought it did. It just alters the presentation, not the content. I guess you would have to ocr to get the content as you see it.

I was wondering why this was never used for an simpler autocorrect, but i guess that's why.

Also perhaps someone more educated on LLMs could tell me; this wouldn't always be consistent right? Like "once upon a time _____" wouldn't always output the same thing, yes? If so even copying and pasting in your own system using the correct font could change the content.

>>polsha+jg
> if you copy and paste your "improved" text then it will no longer say what you thought it did

It's not a bug, it's a feature - a DRM. Your content can now be consumed, but cannot be copied or modified - all without external tools, as long as you embed that TTF somehow.

Which kind of reminds me of a PDF invoices I got from my electricity provider. It looked and printed perfectly fine, but used weird codepoint mapping which resulted in complete garbage when trying to copy any text from it. Fun times, especially when pasting account number to a banking app.

>>magnat+Mo
This is while pretty much all software that extracts structured data from PDFs throws away the text and just OCRs the page. Too many tricks with layouts and fonts.

>>mbb70+yD
I'm always surprised how "generate PDF from Word" turns one word into 10 different print points, all with just a single letter.

Or even straight lines in a table. The straight lines from a table boundary get hacked into pieces. You'd think one line would be the ideal presentation for a line, but who are you to judge PDF?