>>106198814
this is a much easier to understand example

>>106198827
anybody who has touched any image processing tools will recognise it
that is way less people than you assume, anon.

>"64x64 detail" is a detail image that is 64x64 pixels, "crop" would perhaps be a more common term if you aren't familiar with this usage of "detail"
thank you for the explanation, this makes more since.

>>106198835
why do you assume IT people are editing jpegs in enterprise IT? I've set up Microsoft cloud tenants from scratch as a solo tech, including Intune, Autopilot, Entra, Defender, Exchange, Teams Phone with calling, etc. Do you understand why using layman's terms are important now? not every industry professional is fucking with jpegs and image compression

>>106198850
thank you for the explanation, this makes more since.

>>106198870
I spend my day cleaning up after the fuckups that retards like you make. I'm an enterprise janitor.

>>212969451
>was nick holding harland up?
Yes, he tried to stop this cringe shit Sam started

which episode does he suck it? I'm not paying for this trash but I'm not a zoomer so I can track it down.

I have a conspiracy without even watching it that it was supposed to be a quick shot but sam included the whole thing just to shame charls. sad if true.

>spent a decade trying to make their way back into comedy
>started doing standup shows around the country
>became friends with unfunny hacks like david lucas to make inroads
>went on a podcast media tour to promote mde/extreme peace
>bombed horribly on the harland podcast
>"hahahahaha we didn't want to be a part of the LA comedy scene anyway"