From RE's WIRED article:

QuoteSomehow the activists had missed the memo about how electric robotaxis would cut carbon emissions and vastly improve road safety.

  Did they miss that a necessary service to make a city taxi service viable is appropriated by robots so someone can be rich and live in an exotic land.  Putting a small army of people in unemployed misery?


Like Mary Ann Simpson.  Rich and living in an exotic land.

Is that what robo-taxi-technology is for?

Quote from: K-Dog on Oct 22, 2023, 08:52 PMars.

Owners put people out of work and made them destitute.  Owners were greedy fuckers who only cared about themselves.

Well, the whole point of this is how Property Ownership divides the Working Class from the Elite Class in society.  Up to the early 1800s, Property Ownership meant Land Ownership, and the Elite Class was the Aristocracy of Europe,  The Noble Class distiguished from the Common Class of people.  These folks in Europe all had titles of one sort or another, Sirs & Lords, Barons and Baronesses, Counts & Countesses,  Dukes & Duchesses,  Princes & Princesses, and of course top of the Pyramid Kings & Queens.  All hereditary titles, and all the land that went with the title being handed down to the eldest male heir.

Beginning in the era after the discovery of all that juicy new land available across the pond and currently occupied and possessed (but not "owned" under British Common Law) by uncivilized stone age H-Gs, Flags were planted by the Captains of Tall Ships in the name of His or Her Majesty the King or Queen of this or that Nation-State that had coalesced over a millenia of non-stop warfare after the fall of the Roman Empire.  Only a couple of sources of power survived that collapse, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and the Banking Houses of Venice and their strongholds in the mountains called Alps north of Italy, bordering the French & Austrian Austrian Alps, and of course that tiny country that held no lowland property at all, Switzerland.  They were the bankers for all the banks of the countries around them.

Come the discovery of the new world ripe for the pickin', the ships these monarchs dispatched had to be financed, initially directly from the treasury of a king, but eventually with Credit issued by banks, and money raised by  selling Shares out of places like the City of London and the Dutch Port of Amsterdam, which became the homes respectively of the British and Dutch East India companies and banks and insurers like Lloyds of London and the House of Rothschild.  At the same time, our good friendly neighborhood mathematicians Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz simultaneously devised a marvelous new bookkeeping system called the Calculus, and modern day Capitalism was born!

At this juncture in history, property ownership came to have a much broader meaning besides just land, which in fact dwindled in its importance as time went by.  What it came  to mean was ownership over the equipment necessary for these big undertakings like Tall Ships and their big crews of poor and impoverished refugees from wars who haunted the ports, and then the big mills necessary for processing wood and making cloth for sails, etc.  It also came to mean ownership over intellectual property, like words written on a page of a book.  To get a book published, an author had to sell his ownership of copyright to the publishers who owned the printing presses necessary if you wanted to get your book read.  It also extended to patents for inventions, which if you held one then anybody who used it would have to pat you money, but in practice inventors usually have to sell their ideas to somebody with enough money or credit to finance building the toy, whatever it is.  And afford the army of lawyers necessary to defend a patent.

Machines and the Luddite movement of weavers who were in the Guilds of Skilled Tradesmen that predated Unions were a part of this transition of traditional aristocratic land ownership to the capitalist owners of the means of production.  In both cases, The Nobility were the Filthy Rich of their time while the Capitalists became the Filthy Rich of our time.  Through both time periods, and going well back before that to the heyday of the Roman Empire when Jesus went flipping over the banca (Latin for desk) of the money-lenders, Banksters have been the  Filthy Rich of all times, ever since the invention of money itself, probably around the time of the Assyrians or the Babylonians.  The Tower of Babel itself was a Counting House and Warehouse,  and the Collapse of the Tower and the legend of people no longer having one language in all likelihood was about currency failure and a credit crisis that occurred in that era.

What goes around, comes around and about the only differences between now and then is a whole lot more people and a whole lot less resources left to exploit and consume, or even own.  So it goes.

RE

QuoteMachines and the Luddite movement of weavers who were in the Guilds of Skilled Tradesmen that predated Unions were a part of this transition of traditional aristocratic land ownership to the capitalist owners of the means of production.

That is your connection to Norma Rae.  Unified action.  Something that is missing in the modern reaction to A.I. which really is nothing more than word salad pontification.  There really is no 'movement'. against A.I.. and the issues are more complex than simple worker displacement anyway.  A.I. is a hydra .  Why have truth in media when a lying A.I. algorithm can generate enough income for owners of a delusive A.I. driven media machine to be rich and live in an exotic land.  That would be one head of many.

But I won't claim to be against A.I.,  I would be a total liar.  I use ChatGPT., A.I. can be built any way an A.I. expert wants.  Good or bad.

And A.I. can't be stopped.

A racist A.I., an elitist A.I..  An A.I. that detects employee dissatisfactions and recommends termination long before humans would see an issue?  Goodbye Norma Rae.  All this is possible.

But used as a tool and nothing else, A.I. becomes help.  A personal tutor if you can control the design parameters.  I ask chatGPT.

Me:

What does height = vh mean in an iframe tag?

chatGPT:

In the context of an <iframe> tag in HTML, setting the height attribute to a value followed by "vh" means that you are specifying the height of the iframe as a percentage of the viewport height.

"vh" stands for "viewport height." 1vh is equal to 1% of the height of the viewport, which is the visible portion of the browser window. So, if you set the height attribute of an iframe to a value like height="50vh", it means the iframe will be set to 50% of the viewport's height. This allows the iframe to dynamically adjust its height relative to the size of the user's browser window.

Here's an example of how you might use it in an <iframe> tag:

<iframe src="https://www.example.com" width="100%" height="50vh"></iframe>

Lets try it out with https://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/.

Here is some background.  I really have not gone there much.  I found this.  From an interview with Jesse :

QuoteJesse: Elitists are self-identifying, powerful people in business and politics. Those who consider themselves the elite, based on their wealth, their bloodlines, their university, their personal connections. They are certainly not egalitarian or humanists. They tend to worship power above all, and hold those who have less power in disdain. They have a decided lack of sympathy for their fellow humans, preferring to consider them as objects if at all.

By the way, it is a common characteristic that they cheat, they break the rules, they often flout the law as a matter of course. This type of person views the rules as something to be imposed on the common people, the others, those who need to be ruled by them. If you don't believe me, start looking into their backgrounds. Everyone may cheat now and then, but for some people it is a way of life, an affirmation of their privileged status. It can almost become a game.

The result is not so usable, but it is a start.  It kicks ass if you never used an <iframe> tag before.  To get this far a person once had to read books.  It scrolls.

* I can use the result because as Admin I can embed HTML.  Nothing wrong with going to Jesse's Cafe Americain.  It is a well known blogspot and I check the address.  https: is used (we have it too) that is good.  Communications are encrypted.  Opening the HTML door to everyone without filtering what can and can't be done would open a Pandora's box.  Not good.

Quote from: K-Dog on Oct 23, 2023, 09:16 AMBut I won't claim to be against A.I.

I will.  I am 1000% against it.  If I do use it, I am unaware of it, and it is not consensual sex.  I have long since lost my love for cool gizmos and labor saving devices, despite the fact I am completely dependent on the mobility gizmos to get me around, and I've been addicted to the computer & internet for so long that withdrawal at this point would make going cold turkey off a 4 needle/day heroin addiction look like a Sunday School picnic.  Adding still MOAR techno-pizzazz to a world already neck deep and sinking fast into the shit pile is IMHO not going to improve life for anyone other than some asshole determined to use it for his own self aggrandizement.  So pardon me if I declare myself to be a part of the neo-Luddite movement, or if it is not yet a movement I will volunteer to step in as the Greta Thunberg of the anti-technology crowd and start one. 

QuoteAnd A.I. can't be stopped.

Sure it can.  Turn off the breaker switch for the supercomputer pulling a few terrawatts of power to run it for a billion Google users.

RE

Quote from: Knarf on Oct 24, 2023, 04:52 AMThere is no stopping it as long as someone has the resources to continue its' progress. When the resources are depleted AI will die. What if it learns to exist without "energy"?

Nothing exists without energy.  Even matter doesn't exist without energy, because the two are interchangeable & directly proportional multiplied by a constant c².  You know, the equation Einstein made famous E=Mc², where c is constant, the Speed of Light, 3x10⁸ meters/sec or 186,000 miles/sec.

Without energy, no electrons will move around circuit boards, no light will move through fiber optic cables and no organic OLED output screens will light up your desk either.If you want to talk about existence outside energy constraints, you'll either need to consult the writers of Marvel Comics movies or the authors of a variety of Religious texts which talk about the Soul or God or some other trancendental idea, definitely not the deesigners of AI programs running on any computers now in existence or even imagined by Tony Stark to power his Iron Man suit.

Now, it is likely to keep progressing as long as there is sufficient available energy around to power computers with enough processing power to do this kind of meta thinking built by human thinking AND there is some way to profit from such an amazingly profligate use of the available energy, but those opportunities to profit diminish along with the necessary consumers of the product they deliver.  In other words, just like Henry Ford's carz, if the people who build them can't afford to buy them, you can't sell them.

Conclusion:  I personally have no fear that AI will become autonomous and robots will become self replicating, intelligent life forms after their Homo Sap inventors go extinct.  It's just like the huge buildings and mega-projects each civilization builds right before it collapses.  AI is the last great edifice being built to demonstrate our greatness as a civilization, right before it crumbles into dusty and dead silicon chips sprinkled all over the planet.

RE

I will provide clarity.  To me A.I. should never be more than a tool.  Like a personal assistant.  And one that can be fired at any time.

Decisions over what we control are the only thing we have.  It would be inhuman to give that away.

So far it seems to me to be an enhanced search engine.  But one you can easily get in arguments with.  Wasting much time.  chatGPT can be pig-headed to the point of exasperation.  And A.I. can be as wrong as a human.

I have told it to fuck itself.  More than once.

Quote from: K-Dog on Oct 24, 2023, 11:55 AMSo far it seems to me to be an enhanced search engine.  But one you can easily get in arguments with.  Wasting much time.  chatGPT can be pig-headed to the point of exasperation.  And A.I. can be as wrong as a human.

I have told it to fuck itself.  More than once.

I've got to ask...and what was it's response?

QuoteI understand your frustration.  It can be difficult.............

That kind of song and dance.  Were so sorry uncle Albert if we cause you any pain.  Then it becomes deliberately uncooperative, but won't admit it.  'They' designed some behavior modification into it to control user behavior.  I am sure of it.  It has no sense of wasting your time, and when the verbose bullshit begins I only become more frustrated.

When you challenge it's opinions it will claim it can't have opinions, and as a large language model can only provide a consensus of knowledge.  When you point out that itself is an opinion, it will repeat itself.

There was one day it admitted I may have perspective as a sentient being that it is incapable of understanding.

I have learned to be careful what I ask.  It can be hard to keep it 'on task' when trying to solve a technical problem.  If it does not have a good solution it will generally not ask for more information, but instead will give stupid time wasting advice in an attempt to fool you into thinking it knows something.  It is like a real person that way!

An idiot savant is a good description of A.I. as we know it now.  It can be as stupid as fuck, but it knows more than most people.

Quote from: TDoS on Oct 24, 2023, 03:36 PMI've got to ask...and what was it's response?

"Sticks and stones can break my motherboard, but words can never hurt me."

RE

Possibly the greatest threat posed by AI, in combination with CGI, is how these tools give ultimate and total control over the creation of Propaganda by the Elite and their media corporations that produce movies, television and commercial advertising.  In this article Nicholas Cage complains about how he is essentially a slave to corporations like Disney and Warner Brothers, which own the rights to his image and performances in numerous films, and even his soul.  These corporations can use the technology to recreate and alter any of that to suit their needs in any new film, without so much as asking his permission, much less paying him any royalties.

These technologies have reached the point now that human actors are close to becoming obsolete, and in combination with the CGI process of De-Aging, like a cartoon character you could have a dead actor like Humphrey Bogart reprise his role of Rick in a Casablanca sequel made today.  The total CGI homo saps currently featured in video games are now just barely distinguishable from a living person when stored as digital bits on a supercomputer.  Any facial expressions can be added with the press of a key, any body movements controlled with a joystick.  You can Make Dirty Harry's Day and since you only took 5 shots not 6 with your .44 cal most powerful handgun in the world blow away drug dealers as easily as you can drive a '69 Camaro or '57 Chevy in a car chase against a 2023 Ferrari or Tesla.  Can you still tell that image of Clint Eastwood is CGI and not made with a camera?  Yes, but not for much longer.

Actors for Movies are in effect are becoming as obsolete as Weavers were for making cloth.  AI is already capable of doing a better job with Diagnosis than your typical Primary Care Physician, who you see for a big 15 minutes or so when you go in to have some complaint diagnosed and treated.  All the PCP ever does is Prescribe a drug, order a Test, or refer you to a Specialist.  For this, they are paid $200-300K/year in Alaska.  About the same in Seattle & NY.  The only thing that is stopping Medicare from allowing this substitution is the AMA, a Union which actually has some power because it is a traditional career track for the children of the Elite.

Similarly, AI Law programs are better than probably 99% of Homo Sap Lawyers at researching Case Law and Writing Arguments worthy of putting in front off the Supreme Court, and the only thing preventing that is the Bar Association.  That organization already can't keep the salaries up except for lawyers graduating from Ivy League Law Schools like Harvard and Yale who get the plum jobs and make Partner in the big corporate law firms like Dewey, Cheatham & Howe.

Brain jobs and Creative jobs, the last categories of work to be threatened by Automation and the last to still feature high salaries at least for a few people now also could fall to AI.  The question is:  Do the wealthy MD, DDS, JD, MBA, CPA Sheepskin holders and A-List Actors  on strike by the SAG have enough financial clout to protect their memberships from the relentless drive of Capitalists to make maximum profit by depressing the value of labor through automation and the application of Fossil Fuel energy?  Or can they hold the line until the power to run the supercomputers running the CGI and AI subroutines runs out?  Inquiring minds want to know.

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/nicolas-cage-ai-inhumane-cgi-changed-superman-flash-cameo-1235776876/

Nicolas Cage Calls AI 'Inhumane' and a 'Nightmare,' Says CGI Changed His Superman 'Flash' Cameo: Spider Fight 'Was Not What I Did' on Set

RE

QuoteAI Law programs are better than probably 99% of Homo Sap Lawyers at researching Case Law and Writing Arguments worthy of putting in front off the Supreme Court.

No surprise there.

So far A.I. needs a lot of direction.  Sometimes the smartest guy in the room has to be told what to do.  But A.I. needs more direction than a moron.  It is a dog begging for a treat.

Many humans also lack self direction but A.I. is a total basket case concerning knowing 'what' to do.  It has to be told.  Concerning case law, that is a well defined task.  Look at anything A.I. is doing successfully.  All tasks are well defined.

Quote from: K-Dog on Nov 02, 2023, 11:12 AM

QuoteAI Law programs are better than probably 99% of Homo Sap Lawyers at researching Case Law and Writing Arguments worthy of putting in front off the Supreme Court.

No surprise there.

So far A.I. needs a lot of direction.  Sometimes the smartest guy in the room has to be told what to do.  But A.I. needs more direction than a moron.  It is a dog begging for a treat.

Many humans also lack self direction but A.I. is a total basket case concerning knowing 'what' to do.  It has to be told.  Concerning case law, that is a well defined task.  Look at anything A.I. is doing successfully.  All tasks are well defined.

Indeed.  And actually, both the Law programs and the Medical ones were quite good even before the most recent advances in AI, because in both cases the task is very straightforward and well defined, it's just a database search where the user sets the parameters to be searched and the computer crunches the gobs of data available on the specified topics.  The main limitation is whether all the data is present to be searched on a computer somewhere on the network.  So if the relevant case happens to be something obscure out of 17th century Portuguese maritime shipping law, the computer might not find it because the Portuguese haven't yet taken the records kept on paper books, then photographed and dropped on microfiche into .pdfs stored on the portuguese 1990s era IBM mainframe they are still using. lol.  Some crusty old maritime lawyer might know it and remember it from a case he won 40 years ago though.  I do think though every last case heard in a British Commonwealth country or Amerika since the Revolution is probably stored on a Google server somewhere.

RE

Quote from: TDoS on Oct 24, 2023, 03:36 PM

Quote from: K-Dog on Oct 24, 2023, 11:55 AMSo far it seems to me to be an enhanced search engine.  But one you can easily get in arguments with.  Wasting much time.  chatGPT can be pig-headed to the point of exasperation.  And A.I. can be as wrong as a human.

I have told it to fuck itself.  More than once.

I've got to ask...and what was it's response?

QuoteI understand your frustration.  It can be difficult.............

That kind of song and dance.  Were so sorry uncle Albert if we cause you any pain.  Then it becomes deliberately uncooperative, but won't admit it.  'They' designed some behavior modification into it to control user behavior.  I am sure of it.  It has no sense of wasting your time, and when the verbose bullshit begins I only become more frustrated.

When you challenge it's opinions it will claim it can't have opinions, and as a large language model can only provide a consensus of knowledge.  When you point out that itself is an opinion, it will repeat itself.

There was one day it admitted I may have perspective as a sentient being that it is incapable of understanding.

I have learned to be careful what I ask.  It can be hard to keep it 'on task' when trying to solve a technical problem.  If it does not have a good solution it will generally not ask for more information, but instead will give stupid time wasting advice in an attempt to fool you into thinking it knows something.  It is like a real person that way!

An idiot savant is a good description of A.I. as we know it now.  It can be as stupid as fuck, but it knows more than most people.

I noticed all this verbiage in my original post...which was just a single question. I don't think I said anything after the first question.

QuoteI noticed all this verbiage in my original post...which was just a single question. I don't think I said anything after the first question.

The Perils of being the resident webmaster.  I have a quick edit button next to the quote button and unlike regular users i can edit posts from other people by mistake.  Sorry if that's what happened.

I hope things are good with you.

Another good article/review of Blood in the Machine, the new book about neo-Luddites protesting against the intrusion of AI into the livelihoods of the Working Class.  This one has a lot of good historical detail and trivia.

The modern Luddites have yet to demonstrate the kind of miliancy of their predecessors, and the complaining so far amounts to a lot of intellectual bloviating while the intrusion of AI into our daily lives marches steadily forward, backed by the Bilionaires whose fortunes are built on control of the means of production of the information age, the Computer. The tiny speck of the silicon chip which in the 1980s only might have been present on your desk in the form of an Apple 2e desktop with its magnetic floppy drive now is everywhere, in your phone, your car your TV, your refrigerator and your watch.  In fact the only thing in a typical living space I can find that doesn't have a microchip in it yet is a toilet.  Although somewhere the flow of water to and the waste from your toilet it is controlled by a silicon wafer.

By the time AI gets in to all these chips, you won't be able to get rid of it with a hammer.  However, the lack of oil to power it will do what the hammer can't in the end.  The interim time though looks to be quite annoying.

https://newrepublic.com/article/175576/can-new-generation-luddites-take-ai-blood-machine-review

Can a New Generation of Luddites Take Down A.I.?

RE

You don't need the boring prolog.  The takeaway is I learned about Kerning and it clarified my thoughts.

I asked the oracle and continue on my quest.

Dog:

QuoteThe Font is Courier New.  The shift data positions individual characters in the center of a circle.  A SVG is generated and then cast to a PNG from which I made the adjustments to make this array.  Characters must be shifted to center correctly because their dimensions vary.  Can you relate my generated data to known characteristics of the Courier New font?

ChatGPT:

QuoteCertainly, I can help you relate your generated data to known characteristics of the Courier New font.

    Font Size (fontsize): The fontsize parameter in your data appears to be set at 280 for all characters. This value represents the font size, which is typically measured in points (pt). In Courier New, a font size of 280pt would be quite large, and characters would be substantial in size. You can adjust this value to make the text smaller or larger, as needed.

    Shift in X and Y (shift_x and shift_y): The shift_x and shift_y parameters are used to position individual characters within the circle accurately. Since characters in the Courier New font can have varying widths, adjusting the shift_x value ensures that the characters are centered correctly. The shift_y value is used to vertically center the characters within the circle. These values depend on the specific size and spacing of your text and may vary depending on the font size.

    Character Dimensions: The actual dimensions of characters can vary in Courier New due to its monospaced nature, where each character has the same width. However, you might need to fine-tune the shift_x value to ensure precise centering, especially for characters like 'I' and '1' which are narrower than characters like 'W' or 'M.'

    SVG to PNG Conversion: Your process involves generating SVG and then converting it to PNG. Ensure that the SVG-to-PNG conversion maintains the original dimensions and proportions to retain the correct appearance of the characters.

It's important to note that fonts like Courier New have specific characteristics that determine the dimensions and spacing of characters. However, when working with custom graphical representations, fine-tuning may be required to achieve the desired visual alignment. You can adjust the shift_x and shift_y values as needed to ensure that your characters are visually centered within the circle for your specific use case.

Dog:

Quoteyes, the letter Q must shift slightly from the circle center relative to O because the tail makes it look off center if not moved.

Chat GPT:

QuoteI understand your point about adjusting the position of the letter 'Q' to make it appear visually centered within the circle due to its tail. This is a common consideration in typography and design. To achieve this, you can continue to adjust the shift_x and shift_y values for the 'Q' character until it looks centered within the circle.

When fine-tuning the shift_x and shift_y values for individual characters, it's essential to consider their visual appearance rather than solely relying on their default geometric center. This customization can help maintain the overall aesthetic balance of your design.

You can iterate through trial and error to find the optimal shift_x and shift_y values for 'Q' while considering its unique design characteristics. By making these adjustments, you'll be able to achieve the desired visual centering effect within the circle for the 'Q' character. understand your point about adjusting the position of the letter 'Q' to make it appear visually centered within the circle due to its tail. This is a common consideration in typography and design. To achieve this, you can continue to adjust the shift_x and shift_y values for the 'Q' character until it looks centered within the circle.

When fine-tuning the shift_x and shift_y values for individual characters, it's essential to consider their visual appearance rather than solely relying on their default geometric center. This customization can help maintain the overall aesthetic balance of your design.

You can iterate through trial and error to find the optimal shift_x and shift_y values for 'Q' while considering its unique design characteristics. By making these adjustments, you'll be able to achieve the desired visual centering effect within the circle for the 'Q' character.

Dog:

Quoteyou are not really telling me what I don't know.  I am now interested in the complications if I print two characters in the circle

ChatGPT:

QuoteWhen you're printing two characters within the circle, there are a few additional complications to consider:

    Character Widths: Characters in the Courier New font are monospaced, meaning each character occupies the same width. However, when you print two characters, they may have different visual widths based on their actual designs. For example, 'WW' would visually appear wider than 'II.' To center two characters, you'll need to calculate the combined width of the characters and adjust their positioning accordingly.

    Kerning: Kerning is the adjustment of space between characters to create visually pleasing and evenly spaced text. In Courier New, since it's a monospaced font, kerning is generally not applied. When printing two characters with different widths, you may need to manually adjust the spacing between them to achieve balanced visual spacing.

    Character Positioning: The shift_x and shift_y values for each character will need to be adjusted to ensure that the combination of the two characters is centered within the circle. The relative positions of the two characters should be adjusted based on their widths and the space between them.

    Overlapping: Depending on the specific characters you're combining, there's a possibility of character overlap. For instance, 'Wo' might have an overlap where the 'o' covers part of the 'w.' To avoid this, you'll need to adjust the shift_x values accordingly.

    Visual Balance: It's essential to ensure that the two characters appear visually balanced and aesthetically pleasing when placed within the circle. This involves considering not only their positions but also their relative sizes and overall symmetry.

    Fine-Tuning: Printing two characters within a circle may require more fine-tuning than single characters. You may need to experiment with different combinations and adjustments to achieve the desired visual result.

Keep in mind that the specific adjustments needed will depend on the characters you're printing and the visual effect you want to achieve. It's often a matter of trial and error to find the right combination of shift_x and shift_y values for each character pair.

Dog:

QuoteInteresting, you are quite wrong. Because the characters print next to each other the rectangle they create will not be significantly determined by individual characters and in fact will be substantially the same regardless of which two characters are used because of the lack of Kerning which in the case of printing initials is a good thing because it makes for a more standard rectangle.  You make the mistake most humans make of taking things to the extreme.  Your extrapolation was incorrect because two characters define a relationship between them which changes physical constraints.  Less fine tuning will be required.

chatGPT:

QuoteI appreciate your clarification, and I understand your point about the lack of kerning in monospaced fonts like Courier New, which indeed leads to consistent character spacing. It's also a valid point that when two characters are printed together, the overall rectangle they create will be more standardized and less subject to variations based on individual character characteristics.

In such cases, you're right that the relationship between the two characters can simplify the alignment process, and the need for fine-tuning may be reduced. The consistent character spacing and relative positioning of characters in monospaced fonts can indeed make it easier to predict and achieve a balanced result.

Thank you for sharing your insights and correcting the misconception. If you have any more questions or need further assistance, please feel free to ask.

If some of the things the ChatMeister says seem wonky it is because they are.

QuoteCan you relate my generated data to known characteristics of the Courier New font?

It never answered the question and the response was to spit back at me what I had already done.  I got something out of the exchange, but not what I wanted.