OP was making a point about operating systems, not file formats.

It. Does. Not. Matter. That. The. Wikipedia. Article. Doesn't. Specifically. Discuss. Images.

I included it for the definition in the first sentence. That's it. Not because the article is some exhaustive reference that covers every single possible current or future application, which is how you decided to treat it for no reason whatsoever.

The definitions I have provided are sufficient. You haven't challenged any of them, you just keep repeating your own opinions. I'm sorry, but I don't care about your personal interpretation of the word. You are not an authority on the meaning of words.

What the camera would be doing shouldn't be considered semantic

Well, clearly the engineering team at Apple disagrees with you. I disagree with you. The general dictionary definition of "semantic" disagrees with you. But you're clearly obsessed with "proving" your initial knee-jerk opinion is still "correct". It just feels like obstinance at this point. Goodbye.

semantics is different from grammar and syntax but uses those as its foundation

LINGUISTIC semantics does. And that is certainly the usual connotation of the word. But semantics can have a broader meaning. Why are you so insistent that it cannot? You are not arguing with me, you are arguing with dictionaries.

Cherry-picking excerpts discussing semantics in language contexts (eg the computer science quote is specifically about programming languages) doesn't somehow disprove the more general definition I have already provided.

But here are a couple more anyway:

https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
https://www.merriam-webster.co...

Please note the alternate definitions discussing semiotics, signs, "significs", etc.

The closest I come to image semantics is the task of image retrieval when images (whole) are associated with their linguistic categories.

What does "whole" have to do with it? It's only valid to classify entire images? Because... you say so? The article says the algorithm "picks out specific elements of a frame — faces, landscapes, skies". That is semantic analysis. That is "units of meaning".

I'm sorry, what point are you trying to make?

That "semantic analysis" is an incorrect phrase to describe what they're doing here? It is a perfectly correct usage of the word. It's just being used in a way you haven't personally encountered before. Now you have.

Naturally a huge part of "the study of meaning" is going to revolve around what words mean.

Semantics is just the study of meaning. This assigns meaning to different parts of the image.

Semantics (from Ancient Greek: smantikós, "significant") is the study of reference, meaning, or truth. The term can be used to refer to subfields of several distinct disciplines, including philosophy, linguistics and computer science.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I really think you're ignoring the economic potential here.

Extinct animals could be a lucrative tourist attraction. Come see Christmas Island mice, passenger pigeons, and wooly mammoths!

Welcome to... Holocene Park. We spared no expense.

So what are you saying? You support obstructionism on everything Biden proposes? Congress should block the CHIPS Act? Out of... spite over student loan forgiveness?

It's ridiculous how much the game has been dissected already. There are already bot leaderboards and statistical analysis galore. Soon there will be PhD dissertations with titles like Optimizing Machine Learning Techniques to Bifurcate Wordle Search Space.

Um, it's because our chakras are totally out of alignment with the galactic consciousness.

- Someone, probably

The game is also COMPLETELY client-side. The words are all stored internally and it selects the day's current word from a simple date-based algorithm.

Save a local copy, strip out the garbage, and play it free forever.

That does not sound like fun to me either way: losing, or necessarily memorizing lots of material so you have a fighting chance.

Well.. that's chess.

Brain scans of grandmasters have shown the big difference between them and amateurs is they're using their memories a lot more.

Raw, uncompressed bitmaps of 20 megapixel images.

Doesn't everybody use those?

Oh fuck off with your "vaccines cause variants" bullshit.

Delta, the currently predominant strain, emerged before vaccinations. If vaccines hadn't come along when they did, the outcome would've been far worse. Period.

Jury's still out on Omicron's future, but I'll note it emerged in an area with incredibly low vaccination.

Article about this for people who'd like some opinions from medical experts instead of relying on random Slashdot comments (including my own): https://www.healthline.com/hea...

A couple of excerpts:

"The facts that Dr. Montagnier ignores are that, while vaccination may select for some variants, it is still effective at suppressing them and the overall effect is a dramatic reduction of infections and a milder disease when the virus manages to break through the vaccine"

If vaccines were creating new dangerous variants, then Stoilov said we would see proportionately more new variants emerging over time among vaccinated populations than with unvaccinated parts of the world.

There would also be a lot more diversity among the virus variants in countries with high vaccination rates, and increased disease spread and mortality among vaccinated people.

“We see nothing of that. In fact, we see exactly the opposite,” Stoilov said. “In places with high vaccination rates, the case numbers and mortality are dropping; virus diversity is limited to few (one to three) variants; and, so far, no new variants are emerging among vaccinated populations.”

And if your response is a gish galloppy wall of text with dense medical terminology trying to pass yourself off as some expert (a common tactic with this garbage... overwhelm people with "scientific sounding" arguments they are not properly equipped to evaluate), let me just say "fuck off" again in advance, and advise you to take your "scientific" arguments to a venue where other experts in the field can properly debate you, instead of a nerd technology site (or Facebook where I have no doubt you spread this blather too).

The Economist put out an article the other day estimating the true global death toll as 17 million (instead of the official tally of 5 million), undercounting by a factor of 3.4x: https://www.economist.com/grap...

If that is true, Covid has already killed roughly 0.2% of the global population. And it's obviously going to continue to kill a lot more people.

Yup. Even though my TV is really just a big monitor for my computer, I once hooked it up to Wifi.

Then it got hacked during that PewDiePie shit. Never again. (I'd actually like to thank the PewDiePie hackers for demonstrating how insecure my TV was in a harmless way)