zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. maxbon+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-06 05:47:18
"The influencer is non-technical" and "It's strange to see these claims being taken at face value on a technical forum," to me, reads as a dismissal. As in, "these claims are not true and this person doesn't have the background to comment." Non-technical doesn't need to be an insult to be dismissive. You are giving us a reason not to down weight their perspective, but since the outcome is the same regardless of their background, I don't think that's productive.

I don't really see where you said the output was "bad," you said it was a compression artifact which had a "swimming effect", but I don't really see any acknowledgement that the influencer had a point or that the transformation was functionally a filter because it changed their appearance above and beyond losing detail (made their eyes bigger in a way an "anime eyes" filter might).

If I've misread you I apologize but I don't really see where it is I misread you.

replies(1): >>panxyh+QJ
2. panxyh+QJ[view] [source] 2025-12-06 15:09:38
>>maxbon+(OP)
The outcome is visible and not up for discussion, so is the fact that this is a problem for the influencer.

He's getting his compassionate nodding and emotional support in the comments over there.

I agree that him being non-technical shouldn't be discussion-ending in this case, but it is a valid observation, wether necessary or not.

replies(1): >>maxbon+sl1
◧◩
3. maxbon+sl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 20:07:42
>>panxyh+QJ
I'm not commenting on Instagram, I'm not asking anyone to provide this random stranger with emotional support, and I'm not disputing that the analysis was non technical.
[go to top]