• mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think there are individual spots that are bright or dim for no reason because of random noise, up in the no-particular-pattern wilderness

  • 56!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Anyone else getting a blank page? I had to go into inspect element and remove {opacity: 0} on the body to see anything.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s set to fade in from 0 opacity, for some sort of unnecessary “ooh look it’s fancy” effect. My guess is that if you check the console you’ll find that it hit some exception before it completed its little fade-in effect.

      • 56!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It seems to be caused by the FediAct addon, which doesn’t make any sense. Disabling the addon fixes the page without needing a reload, so it must be a CSS issue rather than an exception. Edit: it seems the addon is overriding the fadeIn keyframe, but it looks fixed in the github version.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Might be worth reaching out to the addon authors. Hard to say whether the page or the addon is at fault, but they might be interested to know it even if it’s the page’s fault.

          • 56!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It looks like it’s the addon’s fault, and has already been fixed in the github version. It’s also been abandoned, so it’s probably not worth keeping around anyway.

  • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What’s the big streak at 1000-1031, 1100-31 and 1200-1231?

    It could be brith date, but why only 10-12 specifically? I thought birth months were more normal distributed.

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I got a PIN assigned by my bank back in the 1980s, and it is in that range. I always assumed it was random, because how easy is it to generate a 4-digit random number? But maybe they gave out PINs more like safe combinations. I don’t think you could change them back then, either.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I think that’s the overlap between the dense region of PINs that start with 11, 12, or 13 (similar to the dense regions that start with 21, 22, 23, 31, etc), and the dense square region of month+day dates.

    • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think that specific block is also more likely to be a street address in a city. So it has two reasons to be common easy to remember numbers.