3 ms·

This looks nice, I will try it out. The README could use more of a human touch, though… it’s pretty hard to read.

• carpdiem 2mo ago
  Can I ask which parts? I wrote the intro section by hand, and left the rest of it Fable-generated with significant "guidance" and rounds of re-writing. I think the current weakest part is the explanation of the science behind it, but I'm curious if there was anything specific that jumped out at you.
  • hankbond 2mo ago
    generally it helps to make the readme more of a map of content where you have the big picture for each section and then let people dive via links where they want to know more.
    • carpdiem 2mo ago
      Added in a Table of Contents at the top to improve it for now. May do more substantial re-writes later.
  • addaon 2mo ago
    "These are the exact commanded sRGB values shipped in every export." Tell me what that sentence means and why each of those words is there. Challenge: In the context of the first sentence of a section, with no preceding target for "these." If you manage to assign a meaning: Why do I care, at that point in the readme, about the information in that meaning? "A warm filter is not a tinted overlay." That's lovely (I suppose), but only an AI would start a section by telling me what something is not, rather than what it is. It's also not really a calamari salad, but it didn't see fit to mention that. This time. Strongest AI indicator: Words that may carry meaning, if you don't think so hard, but don't work towards any meaningful narrative (because there is none) -- they carry the LLMs need to generate text, not the reader's need to gain progressive understanding. All of this writing without a mind model of the reader shares the same flaws.