ChaoticNeutralCzech

Thank you, great point!

Finally, I can calmly watch the performance of my stock portfolio

Knowing the perils of wireless energy transfer, I’m glad this didn't go through. Imagine having 2000 W ready to be delivered from anywhere in the walls to a nearby hairdryer, or the metal springs in an unfortunately-placed old-fashioned armchair.

This is what the BBC was trying to prevent

ZJh (base64) in binary is 011001 001001 100001

I analyzed it in another comment: the header says the image is 300x300px 8-bit RGBA but the data is invalid. Most viewers will notice that and show an error.

However, the syntax it used for embedding images is valid, as data:image/png;base64, is the start of a valid image URL and you can use it like other image URLs in supported Markdown interpretors.

Example, using the 103-byte Google Maps' sea tiles, and a 178-byte GIF:

![Google Maps sea map tile]()
![wink.gif]()

renders as

Works in the default web interface

I prefer hexadecimal. The encoded data in its entirety is

89 50 4E 47 0D 0A 1A 0A 
00 00 00 0D 49 48 44 52 
00 00 01 2C 00 00 01 2C 
08 06 00 00 00 B9 B4 AC 
33 00 00 01 A4 49 44 41 
54 78 9C ED DD 41 8E 83 
40 10 85 E1 7F 7F E4 B2 
72 25 92 61 64 98 59 26 
16 49 85 92 61 64 98 59 
26 16 49 85 92 61 64 98 
59 26 16 49 85 92 61 64 
98 59 26 16 49 85 92 61 
64 98 59 26 16 49 85 92 
61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85 
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 
85 92 61 64 98 59 26 16 
49 85 92 61 64 98 59 26 
16 49 85 92 61 64 98 59 
26 16 49 85 92 61 64 98 
59 26 16 49 85 92 61 64 
98 59 26 16 49 85 92 61 
64 98 59 26 16 49 85 92 
61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85 
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 
85 92 61 64 98 59 26 16 
49 85 92 61 64 98 59 26 
16 49 85 92 61 64 98 59 
26 16 49 85 92 61 64 98 
59 26 16 49 85 92 61 64 
98 59 26 1(abrupt end at 4 bits of last byte)

We can analyze the PNG file header. Surprisingly, some of it makes sense.

89 50 4E 47 0D 0A 1A 0A //PNG signature (0x89 P N G 0xD 0xA 0x1A 0xA)

00 00 00 0D // Start of chunk with data length 13 bytes
49 48 44 52 // Type of chunk: IHDR (image header)
00 00 01 2C // Width: 300 px
00 00 01 2C // Height: 300 px 
08 // Bits per color channel: 8 
06 // Color format: 6 (RGBA)
00 // Compression method: 0 (DEFLATE)
00 // Filter method: 0 (Adaptive)
00 // Interlace method: 0 (None)
B9 B4 AC 33 // CRC-32 of chunk (invalid, should be 79 7D 8E 75)

00 00 01 A4 // Start of chunk with data length 420 bytes
49 44 41 54 // Type of chunk: IDAT (image data)
78 9C ED DD 41 8E 83 40 
10 85 E1 7F 7F E4 B2 72 25 
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 16 49 85
92 61 64 98 59 26 1
// 194.5 of the expected 420 data bytes, invalid when attempting to deflate
// the deflate algorithm needs a Huffman tree but an unfull one is presented

Credits to the PNG chunk inspector at nayuki.io

You may try to figure out if the header checksum was stolen from elsewhere and corresponds to another common image size but I cannot be bothered. The data could be subjected to forensic analysis but we only really have 21 unique bytes, the rest is likely nonsense because data encoded by the DEFLATE algorithm is unlikely to be so repetitive. Also, the image in total will likely have just 481 bytes (8+(8+13+4)+(8+420+4)+16), as a less-than-65535-byte IDAT chunk tends to be the last one before a 16-byte trailer. There are very few 300x300 PNGs of such small size we could call memes, most of it will have to be just solid color. Example of a 256x256 map tile you can store in around that size (467 B):

(And this one is pre-optimized, using an indexed palette of just 13 distinct RGB colors as opposed to the full RGBA gamut!)

No idea, it only has 1350 bytes now after the edit, and no crazy formatting

I think you can guess that part. I doubt a current LLM can create a valid PNG, even if it's just a 1x1px one that has been created before. This is partially because PNGs have a checksum and the LLM has definitely not seen enough PNGs in base64 to figure out the algorithm, and is not optimized to calculate checksums. In fact, I analyzed the image and the image header checksum is wrong even though the header makes sense (was likely stolen). Also, it gets penalized for repetition, which occurs a lot in image headers.

AFAIK, the smallest valid image you see mentioned on the web is a 35-byte transparent pixel GIF, and the smallest PNG is a black pixel with 67 bytes:




Testing rendering: , , another 67-byte PNG but 8 px wide: , or 1 gray pixel: , or a green one:

The article + the generator

Are you a country? Cuz I hope you have a good constitution

They know, and a full rewrite, including optimization and UI overhaul is in progress. It's been taking almost a year at ths point.

Announcement / Latest blog post

I am sorry you are left out this fun holiday because of your community’s prejudices