Although, for those who have issues, white on black uses a lot less battery. My phone, at least, swaps to that automatically when the battery gets low.
LJ,
Frankly, it gives me the willies. Too funereal, too haunted-house-ish. Readable, but ... meh.
First time commenting from my phone, BTW. Let's see how it works.
--TP
Another tweak, wpDiscuz only allows the comment box at the top, so I've set the order for Newest to appear first, so anything you are replying to should appear immediately below the comment form box.
Here are before and after images using the prompt, "A woman walks to an excursion boat, probably in Port Aransas, 1907. Please restore the image by removing noise, adding missing detail, sharpening, and colorizing."
I doubt I could read a book or a newspaper using white text on a black background. I have seen web pages like that, and found them just barely tolerable, FWIW.
And yes, this darker font on white background is grrreat.
--TP
I'm not sure about that, I'll never see them in a show, and from a lot of the articles, it looks like they have been slammed with fan mail. They may feel like they are being villianized (is that a word?) and canceled for 'just' telling jokes and trying to make a living, but I think they are fooling themselves pretty profoundly and a letter from a person who occasionally watches a joke they do on Youtube is not really going to have the traction that is needed.
I've changed text color. I'm wondering if the dark version, where it is white on a black background might be better.
As Michael notes, you've got to use the tools at the bottom, going old school with the tags doesn't work. The tools also include adding an image attachment, which people have struggled with.
The link is to Charlie Pierce's blog on the Esquire web site. It uses a pretty similar commenting format, but I think you need a subscription (~$20/yr) to get at the comments. That one uses threads -- you can reply to a comment -- but only 3 levels deep, I think. It has thumbs up/down tracked separately, and a notification function so you (a subscriber) can see who liked, disliked, or replied to your own comments. So, quite more elaborate than what I'm seeing here, but I've grown to like it.
The tags (<b>, </b> etc) don't seem to be working any more (for reasons I bet some of you understand, but I don't). It's a pity, I think they really add.
I think Mayor Pete offers more of this [the media expertise . . . to get the message out effectively] than does Newsom.
Agreed. And he comes across more effectively on social media and on traditional media. I think that we really need both today.
Pete might lose, but at least he would be heard.
I assume you are talking about the 2028 Presidential election. I'd like to think he would have a chance then, but at this point I certainly wouldn't bet the ranch on it. Which we would be doing if the Republicans nominate a MAGA nutcase (but I repeat myself), which seems like a distinct possibility.
I must disagree. There are bad people out there. People who do bad things. But Miller is on a different level. I would say that the correct description is: he is an evil person. Full stop.
ps As my last comment probably makes clear, but just in case not: I mainly believe in civility <b>to</b> the person/people with whom you are actually arguing. Civility <b>about</b> people you have strong and justifiable opinions on is a different thing, at least in my opinion.
I should add, I'm more concerned here with gaining the upper hand in how the issues get framed than I am with electability. Newsom fits fewer prejudices than do Pritzker or Buttigieg. I just don't think that what he is saying cuts through enough to change the conversation, and I think the conversation we are having is a losing conversation for the Dems.
lj- As a note, in Kamala Harris’ recent book, she said that she wanted Buttgieg, but thought that it was ‘asking too much of America’ (if I remember the quote correctly). I’m not second guessing that, I’m just imagining an America where it wouldn’t be asking too much.
I understand this reaction, but what wj had asked for was:
...someone else who a) is willing to stand up, and b) has the media expertise available to get the message out effectively.
I think Mayor Pete offers more of this than does Newsom. And I think that if the Dems want to break through, they are going to have to find someone that is more a brawler than a point fighter. Newsom is all jab with no follow-up, and he's too much of a lightweight to land a knockout with a jab. Both the guys I countered with seem capable of landing some body blows.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk”
Well, I can start watching this guy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb0Vd-XnlkU
On “Excelsior 2.1”
Although, for those who have issues, white on black uses a lot less battery. My phone, at least, swaps to that automatically when the battery gets low.
"
LJ,
Frankly, it gives me the willies. Too funereal, too haunted-house-ish. Readable, but ... meh.
First time commenting from my phone, BTW. Let's see how it works.
--TP
"
We've done dark writing on light media since at least the ancient Egyptians. For a variety of reasons, including how the human vision system works.
"
Another tweak, wpDiscuz only allows the comment box at the top, so I've set the order for Newest to appear first, so anything you are replying to should appear immediately below the comment form box.
"
Tony P. and all, how about this?
"
That one uses threads — you can reply to a comment — but only 3 levels deep, I think.
Wouldn't happen here, but I've seen websites' comment quality go downhill fast after threaded comments were introduced.
On “Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk”
I intended my comments for the Excelsior 2.1 post. :(
"
After processing the image. The "AI" took some liberties with the details it added. Like giving the men hats.
"
Images huh?
I've been playing around with Google AI Studio.
Here are before and after images using the prompt, "A woman walks to an excursion boat, probably in Port Aransas, 1907. Please restore the image by removing noise, adding missing detail, sharpening, and colorizing."
On “Excelsior 2.1”
I doubt I could read a book or a newspaper using white text on a black background. I have seen web pages like that, and found them just barely tolerable, FWIW.
And yes, this darker font on white background is grrreat.
--TP
On “Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk”
I'm not sure about that, I'll never see them in a show, and from a lot of the articles, it looks like they have been slammed with fan mail. They may feel like they are being villianized (is that a word?) and canceled for 'just' telling jokes and trying to make a living, but I think they are fooling themselves pretty profoundly and a letter from a person who occasionally watches a joke they do on Youtube is not really going to have the traction that is needed.
On “Excelsior 2.1”
like this ? Aha! And I've never known how to
strike through"
I've changed text color. I'm wondering if the dark version, where it is white on a black background might be better.
As Michael notes, you've got to use the tools at the bottom, going old school with the tags doesn't work. The tools also include adding an image attachment, which people have struggled with.
"
Testing. Testing. Testing. How about a link.
The link is to Charlie Pierce's blog on the Esquire web site. It uses a pretty similar commenting format, but I think you need a subscription (~$20/yr) to get at the comments. That one uses threads -- you can reply to a comment -- but only 3 levels deep, I think. It has thumbs up/down tracked separately, and a notification function so you (a subscriber) can see who liked, disliked, or replied to your own comments. So, quite more elaborate than what I'm seeing here, but I've grown to like it.
--TP
"
<em>Alternate test of various ways</em> to do <strong>emphasis.</strong>
"
You have to use the tools along the bottom edge of the comment edit
window."
The tags (<b>, </b> etc) don't seem to be working any more (for reasons I bet some of you understand, but I don't). It's a pity, I think they really add.
On “Where are the 5 words?”
I think Mayor Pete offers more of this [the media expertise . . . to get the message out effectively] than does Newsom.
Agreed. And he comes across more effectively on social media and on traditional media. I think that we really need both today.
Pete might lose, but at least he would be heard.
I assume you are talking about the 2028 Presidential election. I'd like to think he would have a chance then, but at this point I certainly wouldn't bet the ranch on it. Which we would be doing if the Republicans nominate a MAGA nutcase (but I repeat myself), which seems like a distinct possibility.
On “Excelsior 2.1”
Darker type in these comments, please. Middlin' gray doesn't cut it for these old eyes.
On “Where are the 5 words?”
Stephen Miller. He’s a bad person, full stop.
I must disagree. There are bad people out there. People who do bad things. But Miller is on a different level. I would say that the correct description is: he is an evil person. Full stop.
"
ps As my last comment probably makes clear, but just in case not: I mainly believe in civility <b>to</b> the person/people with whom you are actually arguing. Civility <b>about</b> people you have strong and justifiable opinions on is a different thing, at least in my opinion.
On “Excelsior 2.1”
Just an observation that you have to have JavaScript enabled in order to leave comments now.
Testing the attach-an-image comment feature:
On “Where are the 5 words?”
I should add, I'm more concerned here with gaining the upper hand in how the issues get framed than I am with electability. Newsom fits fewer prejudices than do Pritzker or Buttigieg. I just don't think that what he is saying cuts through enough to change the conversation, and I think the conversation we are having is a losing conversation for the Dems.
Pete might lose, but at least he would be heard.
"
lj- As a note, in Kamala Harris’ recent book, she said that she wanted Buttgieg, but thought that it was ‘asking too much of America’ (if I remember the quote correctly). I’m not second guessing that, I’m just imagining an America where it wouldn’t be asking too much.
I understand this reaction, but what wj had asked for was:
...someone else who a) is willing to stand up, and b) has the media expertise available to get the message out effectively.
I think Mayor Pete offers more of this than does Newsom. And I think that if the Dems want to break through, they are going to have to find someone that is more a brawler than a point fighter. Newsom is all jab with no follow-up, and he's too much of a lightweight to land a knockout with a jab. Both the guys I countered with seem capable of landing some body blows.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.