正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

A file transfer setup using no internet, Bluetooth, or USB drive. The sender converts the file into encoded QR code frames displayed rapidly on screen. The receiver scans those frames continuously with its camera and reconstructs the original file. The camera is the only communication bridge. Works entirely offline...

61,841 次观看 • 2 天前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

👀 I used OpenAI's Code Interpreter to make Flappy Bird 🐦in 7 minutes: Code Interpreter/GPT-4 for code generation. Pre-existing or AI-generated assets for graphics. --- Here's how to make the game in only 6 steps: (1): Enter the following prompt: "write p5.js code for Flappy Bird where you control a yellow bird continuously flying between a series of green pipes. The bird flaps every time you left click the mouse. If the bird falls to the ground or hits a pipe, you lose. This game goes on infinitely until you lose and you get points the further you go". (2): Use generative AI or existing game assets and spirits. I searched "flappy bird assets" on Google and used the first link, a GitHub repo with pngs from the original Flappy Bird. (3): Use this prompt to link assets to the code: "Please generate the entire file again based on the fact I'm using a unique background, spirits for the bird, and pipes. Here is the list of assets I'm using: [list of file names]." Code Interpreter should modify the code accordingly to include the list of file names. (4) Make an account OpenProcessing -> create a sketch -> paste in the code generated by Code Interpreter -> upload in-game assets from step (2). (5) (Optional) Ask ChatGPT to make changes to improve the in-game experience e.g., adding a high score, restarting the game when the bird dies, etc. Copy the new code into your OpenProcessing sketch and reload the game. (6) If something doesn't work, ask GPT4 to fix it. Copy and paste the error message and ask it to regenerate the code. --- Bonus Tips: - Iteratively test code. Each time you make a change using Code Interpreter, test the updated code by playing the game so you catch new bugs early. - Learn programming by asking questions: "Act as a senior programmer very good at explaining concepts to a beginner. Tell me how gravity works in this game and how you used code to make this happen."Code Interpreter/GPT4 for code generation. Download Pre-existing assets or generate new images for graphics. Excited to see what you make!

Alex Ker 🔭

739,874 次观看 • 3 年前

I cut the ending of Blake stream from last night because what he says about the 3.2GB UVU Review video needs to be heard — and questioned — by everyone following this case. The highest quality recording of the entire event. No independent investigator has the original file. And the metadata raises a question Blake didn't have a genuine answer for. *Let's start with the biggest problem.* On Blake's Mac, the file shows a date of September 9th. The Charlie Kirk event at UVU was September 10th. The video file is dated the day before the event it recorded. When Blake is asked about the Sept 9 date he says "this is the copy.. it was what I downloaded and copied into my iPhoto album." That's not an explanation for a file that predates the event. That's just describing what he did with it. He never gives reasonable explanation for the Sept 9 date. Keli Rabon asks the obvious question: "So, like why would it say Sept 9 is what they are asking?". A commenter originally asked about the date which is seen in the video below. Blake's response: "I have no idea." "I have no idea" is not acceptable when you're the sole custodian of the highest quality recording in a capital murder case. That metadata anomaly can be examined and potentially explained — but only with access to the original 3.2GB file. Which no independent investigator has. Blake claims he "released" the video on X back on November 5th. Technically true. What he released was a version he edited, watermarked, and uploaded to X — which compresses everything. The result? The public got files in the range of 15MB to 600MB. The original is 3.2GB. That's not a release. That's a fraction of the data. For forensic work — acoustic, ballistic, visual — compression destroys exactly the information that matters. Frame-level detail, audio fidelity, embedded metadata. All of it degraded or stripped. His defense: he's not a professional video editor and didn't realize that editing, watermarking, and uploading to social media would degrade the quality. You don't need to be a professional to understand that a 3.2GB file doesn't come out the other end at 15MB without losing almost everything. It gets stranger. Elizabeth from UVU Review contacted Blake and asked him to take the video down. He posted screenshots of that conversation on X. So there's a documented chain of custody complication — UVU Review wants it pulled, Blake had the file, and nobody doing forensic analysis has the original. When pressed on why he won't just release the 3.2GB file, Blake tells people to contact Elizabeth at UVU Review directly. He has the file. He chose to edit it, watermark it, compress it, and upload the degraded version. Now he's redirecting responsibility to someone who asked him to take it down. Then there's the "metadata verification". midGray on X who has been inactive in the investigation for months, supposedly examined the file and concluded there was no intentional tampering. He pulls the video midGRAY made in an attempt to validate himself. Blake says midGray worked from files downloaded from X but also contradicts himself by showing midGRAY also says Blake sent him the original file for which he has screenshots of metadata and was able to examine in hand. Watch the end of this stream. Keli Rabon starts asking the right questions — pointed, specific, reasonable — and Blake visibly checks out. Stops engaging. Gets uncomfortable. That's not what confidence in your own position looks like. This isn't about accusing Blake of anything nefarious, although it is very strange. It's about a simple principle: If you possess the highest quality recording of a capital murder case, and the metadata shows a date that predates the event, and investigators are asking for the original file — you release it. You don't compress it, watermark it, and tell people to ask someone else. Why not just release the original file for investigators to examine Blake ?

troofevades

46,017 次观看 • 3 个月前

KNOXNET — $KNX Public Testing Now Live We are pleased to announce that "public testing for the KnoxNet Android APK" is now live. This release marks a major milestone in our development enabling value transfers without any internet connectivity. The current build allows users to experience the core offline infrastructure in a real-world environment for the first time ever. The ability to transfer value completely offline has never been achieved at this level. As this system matures and moves toward full integration with the KnoxNet chain, the implications become significantly larger. Key Features in this Build: * Offline send and receive of KNX notes * Device-to-device communication over Bluetooth * Local validation with instant acknowledgement (handshake-based transfer) * Works fully in airplane mode (no internet, no fallback) * Duplicate note detection on receiver side * On-device transaction history --- ⚠️ Disclaimer This is a testing environment. Each user will be provided with 10,000 KNX test notes upon setup. These are not real funds and are intended solely for testing and feedback purposes. --- 📲 Download the APK 📘 Documentation (How to Use) 🛠 Support & Troubleshooting --- This release represents the first step toward a new category of infrastructure where value can move independently of network conditions. Privacy, as a sector, has seen limited innovation over the years and we intend to change that. What is being built here positions KnoxNet at the forefront of privacy infrastructure, not just competing within the category, but defining it. We encourage all users to test the application thoroughly and share feedback as we continue to refine and scale the system.

KnoxNet

57,628 次观看 • 2 个月前