gpu_explorer

Thanks. I changed the setting, but it didn't help much. It's smart to optimize for small files, since those are probably 99% of your use cases.

You might want to remove the part of your web site that says "View Large Files Quickly" because I was very excited when I read this and then very disappointed when it wasn't fast at all.

Notepad++ can open the file instantly and allows me to move around very quickly. You'd probably need something close that level of performance before you can claim that your product is fast for large files.

Gotta eat your own dog food, yes?

Yes, it's just a .CSV file of a 1920x1080 image. Every value in the .CSV file is 9.

9,9 ... until 1920 columns.

...

until 1080 rows.

Would you mind explaining the biochemistry of the following statement: "The vaccines however generate large quantities of the more potent Wuhan 2019 spike."

Please including at least a few sentences that precisely describe the differences in the structure and chemistry of what you call the "Wuhan 2019 spike" compared to the Omicron spike protein.

It would be great if you could also explain specifically how differences between the structure and chemistry of the "Wuhan 2019 spike" and the Omicron spike protein support the allegations you're making.

Do you think differences in spike protein structure and chemistry have implications for immune system modulation via signaling molecules? If so, which signaling molecules and which cell lines?

Who is allowed to submit reports to VAERS? How many of the 28,000 reports in VAERS are deaths?

Hundreds of thousands of people are dead from vaccine refusal in the US and meanwhile on you talk about an appreciation for science and reason.

That is your opinion stated as if it were a fact.

Here are facts:

Anti-vax is a shortening of the term anti-vaccination, and it is not a surprise to find that people who are 'anti-vax' are against vaccinations, and many of them actively try to recruit people to their cause of avoiding vaccines. Anti-vaccination is a highly accurate term.

I and many others who are pro-vax don't think that anti-vax people are against a vast range of science-based medicines. To the contrary, I am amazed at how many anti-vax people will smoke cigarettes (DNA poisons) and drink alcohol (DNA poison) and take antibiotics and blood pressure medicines and see a dentist and see a regular doctor. Not to mention that many who are against a covid vaccine have had many other vaccines. This selective position against vaccines and not other treatments only makes their anti-vax attitude appear even more irrational.

But if you want different word, then vaccine hysteria would be a good choice. Because that's what anti-vax attitudes have caused, and now a few hundred thousand people have died from it. Think of the damage all those avoidable deaths will cause for millions of people.

I tried this and it couldn't open a 6MB CSV file with 1920 columns and 1080 rows. Or maybe it could sometime if I decide that I can wait long enough. Notepad++ can open this file almost instantly.

Not impressed.

> Data please? Have you been living under a rock?

> There are very intelligent people on HN, but this weird obsession with data and scholarly articles is honestly stupid. We're not talking about events that occurred 100 years ago, we are all living this right NOW!

I would just like to see data that supports what you propose in your original remarks. It doesn't have to be an encyclopedia of references. It's okay if there isn't data - I'll just assume you're sharing your opinion (which is totally cool as well of course).

> I'm probably going to get down voted, which only proves my points.

It proves precisely none of your points. Data please.

It's interesting that you raise totalitarians like Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot in this discussion. What are you trying to imply? Implication isn't a sound argument.

> Social media companies are common carriers, just another set of telecom utilities that must be regulated so they cannot deny users access once they’re above a certain size.

In your opinion. There are many good arguments against this and you know it.

> Also your claims of judging and disallowing speech on a subjective determination of being “antisocial” is exactly the kind of authoritarian kafka-esque censorship that makes the policies of these huge tech platforms incompatible with a free society.

This sounds like your arguments are misinformed or perhaps not realizing how things are.

Speech is already heavily regulated by civil agreements throughout American society. I don't have enough time to type all the examples, but here are a few: you can't sell trade secrets from your employer and claim freedom of expression, you can't scream loudly during a theater performance, you can't curse in a restaurant, you can't go sell things 'table-to-table' in a restaurant, you can't make public statements about someone's marital fidelity, or whether or not they have transmissible infections or diseases. There are many other examples.

So there are already pretty strong guards against behaving in antisocial manner and trying to claim that it's 'protected speech'. But I understand that it's very convenient for you to try to say that such guards are 'authoritarian' and 'kafka,esque' instead of presenting even a tiny crumb of valid argument against my very well-argued position.