TV reviews tend to talk about it as a negative thing though lol.

I mean yeah, the amount of human soul, creativity, grit and engineering that has gone into making audio compressors and transient designers that can heavily change a signal input without it sounding bad, even arguably sounding better because of the inherent distortion it causes is incomprehensible if you have never gone down the rabbit hole of audio engineering technology.

TV reviews tend to talk about it as a negative thing though lol.

This is good, also thank you for the recommendation for RTINGS that is good to know!

I don't really want a basic visual brightness limiter like what the Total Brightness Limiter seems like though I am glad the most basic version of this exists in some fashion in monitor technology. What I really want is a more sophisticated, nuanced control where the rate of change of total brightness (as well as localized brightness to some degree ideally) is limited rather than the total absolute brightness being limited. As in, the screen can modulate between a very wide degree of brightness but only so fast, especially if the changes are happening at high brightness levels. Or to put it another way, my eyes are comfortable going anywhere all the way from the bottom to the top of the mountain, it is the cliffs that abruptly transition between one elevation and another especially at high altitude that my eyes don't like.

TV reviews tend to talk about it as a negative thing though lol. My Sony Bravia does that. My Samsung smartphone from 2012 had that when you put it in “reader” mode but I think they got rid of it with later models.

Edit: some manufacturers also call this “selective dimming” but you have to be careful with that because sometimes it means the panel will do the exact opposite of what you’re asking for and artificially boost the bright areas.

Anyways I would highly recommend rtings.com as they do a much better job of documenting these features than the manufacturers do lol.

I get really frustrated that people always respond this way, the difference between a compressor and a volume knob + eq is that the compressor dynamically responds to inputs whereas a basic volume knob and equalizer do not dynamically respond to inputs but rather apply the same effect equally to all of the audio sent through it... this is one of the first things you learn in audio engineering and production and yet it is a total alien concept in computer displays even though everyone is constantly gouging their eyes out because we don't have a way to place a limiter on how drastically contrast can change on a computer monitor.

Think of it this way, you can manually make a volume knob into a compressor by sitting there and turning it up and down on a track as you listen, this is what all those faders are for on mixing boards in studios, so that an audio engineer can go through a track and slightly adjust volume levels on each track throughout the span of the track in order to create a balanced mix.

The reason compressors were invented is it is tedious to do this to every little part of an audio track for every audio track and that a general algorithmic/analog circuit can be set up to only begin turning the volume knob down when the input signal gets above a certain loudness threshold (however that is measured by the compressor design) and to return turn the volume knob back to its original position once the signal drops below a certain loudness threshold.

The specific family of compressor designs that are most relevant to computer displays are called in audio engineering "transient designers" (most often used to tame the intense transient energy from sibbilants or plosives in vocal tracks, think sh sounds and p or b sounds) as they allow you to shape how much the signal can change in overall energy over a unit of time. You can reduce the punch inherent to most sounds that happen at their beginning or increase it, with computer displays a similar tool would allow you to limit how quickly the computer screen could change overall brightness (perhaps applied on a local and global scale).

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/spl-transient-designer

https://www.kvraudio.com/product/elysia-nvelope-by-plugin-alliance

if they were calling Lemmy APIs directly they would significantly reduce the load they bring to our service. if they were speaking ActivityPub they could even get the content delivered to their front door directly via federation.

they don't care that they DDoS websites. they don't care about optimizing for how certain types of websites are built, to reduce impact on third parties. the only language they speak is DDoS.

they intentionally spoof legitimate browser user agents and cycle through massive ranges of IP addresses. they have enormous pools of IPv4 addresses available that allow them to only use each IP for a couple of requests before cycling to the next one, which is yet another way they evade detection, as they are bypassing any rate limits we have configured that way.

Dark Mode in a dark room will always be an anxiety inducing experience because it is exactly like not putting a hard limiter on your audio chain to protect against sudden loud noises destroying your ears.

What is needed are a suite of visual dynamics tools at nearly the last step of graphical display, it could even be a setting on computer monitors themselves. It pisses me off this doesn't already exist honestly.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cloudflare+security+levels&ia=images&iax=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fmediafortress.com.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F08%2FCloudflare-security-level.gif

Edit: for the record I don't at all judge. Web has rampant bit activity these days and it's a lot even for a large team.

Slash there are other settings in CF that could affect the behavior so it could be something else. Sae a comment that it was login-aware which makes me think it's more than just the security levels