与「Original」相关的搜索结果

DeepSeek 官方说 deepseek-flash 能直接看图，三种传图方式，一次最多 600 张 建议收藏，用到时照着做。做完你能让 DeepSeek 读截图、看图表、描述图片。 这是 DeepSeek 官方 API 文档 Vision（视觉）一页。先说结论： 官方写明，deepseek-flash 模型可以文字加图片一起输入，用来描述图片、读截图里的字、分析图表。 先说清词。 Vision，视觉输入，意思是让模型看图。 base64，是把图片文件转成一长串文字，直接塞进请求里的编码方式。 file_id，是先把图片传到官方的 Files API（文件接口），拿回来的一个编号，之后用编号代替图片。 先把话说全： 官方支持的图片格式是 JPEG、PNG、GIF、WebP，官方说格式按文件真实内容判断，不看文件名。 官方写明，assistant（模型自己的）消息里放图片，会返回 400 错误；图片只能放在 user、system、tool 消息里。 一、三种传图方式 第一种：base64 内联。官方说最适合本地文件，把图片编码后做成 data: 开头的地址放进请求，整个请求体上限是 48 MiB。 第二种：外部图片链接。给一个公开的 http 或 https 地址，官方限制：链接最长 8192 个字符，图片最大 32 MiB，下载要在 60 秒内完成。 第三种：Files API 的 file_id。官方说同一张图要反复用，或者图太大，就先上传再用编号。这种方式图片可以到 64 MiB。 二、请求怎么写 第一步：model 写 deepseek-flash。官方说旧名字 deepseek-v4-flash-vision-exp 还能用，但已经退役，实际由最新的 Flash 模型处理。 第二步：messages 里 content 不再是一句话，而是一个列表，里面一块是 text 文字，一块是 image_url 图片。 第三步：Responses API 也能传图，图片放在 input_image 里，文字放在 input_text 里。 三、detail 清晰度开关 官方写明，image_url 可以加 detail 字段。low 会把图缩到 512×512 再看，更快更便宜；high、original、auto 目前都是保持原图。 四、费用和上限 官方说图片按尺寸换算成 token，和文字一起计费。每张图最多 1024 个 token，因为太大的图会先被缩到约 1300×1300 的像素量。 官方给的上限：每次请求最多 600 张图；单边最长 8192 像素，一次放 15 张以上时降到 4096 像素；不含 file_id 的图合计 64 MiB，含 file_id 最多 200 MiB。 五、用 Anthropic 接口也行 官方说把 base_url 写成 image 块，source 的 type 可以是 base64、url 或 file。用 file 时要加请求头 anthropic-beta: files-api-2025-04-14。 常见坑 3 条： 一、把图片放进 assistant 消息，会直接报 400。二、外链图片超过 32 MiB 或 60 秒下不完，就改用 file_id。三、一次放 15 张以上，单边别超过 4096 像素。 复制即用的提示词：请描述这张图片，列出图里所有文字，再用三句话总结它想说明什么。 收藏版：5 步速查 一、model 写 deepseek-flash。二、选 base64、链接或 file_id 传图。三、content 写成文字块加图片块。四、格式用 JPEG、PNG、GIF、WebP。五、别把图放进 assistant 消息。 S1哥 观点：官方把每张图封顶 1024 个 token，说明传图比很多人想的便宜，截图问答可以放心大量用。 一句话结论：DeepSeek 读图，认准 deepseek-flash，小图用 base64，大图或重复用 file_id。想让朋友少踩坑，复制链接发给他。 你是想让它读截图还是看图表？卡在第几步？同系列前几篇在我主页。 参考：DeepSeek 官方文档 Vision（S1哥 整理） 今天送：DeepSeek 看图请求自检清单，评论区第一条直接拿。

Perplexity raised $1.5 billion, yet financial research still has a fundamental problem. Information is only useful if it's accurate, current, and actionable. These are the philosophies that encompass Seer. Seer actively researches the market, checks X, reads original sources, analyses price action, and builds a trade thesis with entries, targets, and risk parameters. Seer brings financial research, intelligence, and execution together, all within one environment tailor made for agentic use. 7 days.

Had to bring back my OG NFT artist name, WILDFLOWER 🌸, for this one! At Adobe MAX, I got to create my own 1-of-1 Creator Card using @AdobeFirefly, turning a personalized AI-generated artwork into a physical collectible card! ✨ And the best part? Experiencing it with Adriana, who I originally met through NFTs. 🥹 From digital collectibles to AI-powered creativity… talk about a full-circle moment! Some things are truly non-fungible. 💗 #AdobeFireflyAmbassadors# #AdobeAmbassadorsAtMAX# #CommunityxAdobe#

X AI ALGORITHM UPDATE (BIG ONE) 🚨 X updated their open source algorithm yesterday and the biggest number in it is gone: copy link went from 20 to 0 points. Small accounts should focus on: posts people like, reply to and stay on (so stop counting on link copies) tl;dr: - on Nov 13 X's open source code set the score for copying a post's link to 0 - copy link: 20 → 0 - it was the top score in the whole system, 4x a reply - the code also names a "copy link bait" spam check - likes (0.708), replies (5) and DM shares (5) didn't move full details: - The number that's gone Since I started reading X's open source code in August, one number sat at the top: 20, for someone tapping share and copying your post's link. Nothing else came close. As of the Nov 13 release, it's 0. X still guesses who'll copy your link. It just multiplies that guess by 0 now. X didn't explain it. It's just what the code says. (I check the open source algo daily with Claude and share updates with you) - Cross it off your list My own checklist called copy link the biggest number. Last week's post said it too. It was true then. It isn't now. If you saved that list, cross that line out. - The "copy link bait" check X's code now mentions a spam check called "copy link bait". In the code it adds a spam label to the post, and that label already keeps a post out of strangers' feeds. It only shows up in a test, so I can't see if it's running or how strict it is. My read: X saw people baiting link copies, so it turned the score off and built something to catch the bait. That's a read, the code doesn't say why. - Why that matters if you're small If your plan was posts people copy the link to, that plan now earns 0 in X's ranking. A copied link can still bring people in from outside X. It just doesn't push your post up anymore. What still pays: likes at 0.708 (the highest ever), people staying on your post, replies at 5 and back and forth with mutuals at 20. - Also new: photo and video tags If a post has a spam label, people you tag in its photo or video who don't follow you won't get notified. Same idea as last week's rule for replies. - What didn't change Every other score. Your new posts still get their extra push in the first 2 hours and first 200 views, and early likes still pick which one gets it. Here's a recap of what you should be doing: - aim for likes, replies and time spent, the copy link score is gone - a DM share still earns 5, same as a reply or a quote - likes sit at 0.708, never higher - time on your post keeps counting at its best rate yet - 10+ seconds after someone taps in adds 0.385 - write your replies yourself, under big accounts most of all - give people a reason to hang around your profile - in videos the opening seconds carry it, an open alone scores 0 - posts read to the end help X find you strangers - smaller accounts (below 50K) get a shot at a spot near 16 for a fresh original - early likes decide which new post gets that spot - post when your followers are awake, the push lasts 2 hours and 200 views - mutuals going back and forth earn 20, so follow back the regulars - only your originals ever get shown to strangers - like 1 and like 32 each unlock another way to reach strangers - one strong post per feed, your second only counts 62% - clips longer than 10 seconds for the video lists - a post likely to win you a follow gets +4 - give your pinned post a look, it can affect the whole account What you should NOT be doing: - counting on copy link shares, they score 0 now - baiting link copies, the code names a spam check for exactly that - a spam label also stops your photo tags reaching non-followers - AI-written replies under big accounts, "llm slop" is a flag X uses - copy-paste replies, labeled ones skip non-followers' notifications - chasing taps, 0.274 and dropping - drifting off your topic, each probable "not interested" takes 53.07 away - videos people open and leave, the open itself earns 0 - posting at 3am, it wastes the 2 hour push - expecting replies and reposts to reach strangers - an insult label, it hides that post from non-followers - earning a misinfo or low quality label, which adds a warning and locks strangers out of liking or sharing - 3 adult photos or videos among your latest 5 posts, that puts a label on you - forgetting videos get rechecked at 64 and 512 likes - one account label and strangers stop seeing you - pinning a link to a site X rates badly, that can mean a label for a week - posting your own old words again risks the copypasta flag - a low quality link plus tagged strangers reads as spam - bait for engagement, big or small it gets a label - several posts back to back, they split the same feed - hashtag piles, they do nothing - bookmarks for reach, they score 0 - hoping a 3 day old post still lands in For You, it stops at 2 days

not all crypto rewards are created equal. when a platform advertises yield, i think the first thing to check is what holders actually receive and where that value comes from. @RebateLaunch has an interesting approach to this. instead of paying holder rewards in newly issued $rebate, eligible holders receive payouts in the pair asset. on robinhood chain, that's usdg. the platform reports: → $28.5k distributed to holders. → 120,403 individual payouts. → rewards sent several times throughout the day. → no staking or manual claiming required. but the reward distribution is only one part of the model. rebate pad also uses a declining launch tax to address early sniping. → 99% during the initial stage. → 66% in the next stage. → 33% in the following stage. these penalties go into a locked treasury that supports the buyer bonus mechanism. separately, the 0.7% platform fee is used to buy $rebate from the market and burn it. the reported cumulative burn has reached 35.3m tokens, representing 3.53% of the original 1 billion supply. what makes this model worth examining is how several mechanisms connect: ✦ early launch activity contributes to the treasury. ✦ the treasury supports buyer bonuses. ✦ trading fees fund holder payouts and the $rebate buyback-and-burn mechanism. my perspective is that paying rewards in the pair asset is an interesting distinction because holders aren't simply receiving more of the same token. however, attractive payout numbers alone don't prove sustainable yield. trading volume, fee generation, treasury health and long-term user activity still matter. i'd rather evaluate the source of rewards than focus only on the advertised percentage. also, round 3 of the creator campaign closes november 17 at 22:00 utc. the real question is whether rebate pad can maintain this economic cycle as adoption grows. $rebate

This slide from the Anthropic IPO roadshow was a big factor in my decision to leave. It’s an insane plot and I’m surprised they made it public. It shows the compute efficiency of pretraining over time. The y-axis is a **log scale**: they are seeing continued superexponential algorithmic progress. Mythos was not a one-time deviation, but a point on a superexponential. They could already retrain Mythos with a fraction of the compute originally needed. It doesn’t strictly imply a software-only intelligence explosion- they have been spending more on R+D. But algorithmic improvements do not require ridiculous creative genius and are on the verge of being automated. You do the math.

🚨 HERE’S WHY BITCOIN IS NONSTOP DUMPING RIGHT NOW It's NOT because of the stock market AI bubble. It's NOT because of the rising inflation. It's NOT because of retail panic selling. Bitcoin no longer trades like a supply-and-demand asset. The crypto market has changed FOREVER. And what we're seeing right now is not ordinary price action. It’s not weak hands, changing sentiment, or retail panic. Something much bigger is happening behind the scenes, and most people haven't even realized it yet. By the time the crowd catches on, it'll already be too late. This didn't happen overnight. The structural shift has been developing for YEARS, and now we're seeing its consequences. Here's what nobody wants to acknowledge: The moment synthetic supply enters the equation, genuine scarcity loses its meaning. And once scarcity stops determining price, the market no longer discovers value through actual ownership. Price discovery moves into derivatives. That's precisely what has happened to Bitcoin. We've already witnessed this exact transformation in: → Gold → Silver → Oil → Equities Once derivatives became dominant, the underlying market structure changed permanently. Bitcoin is now facing the same reality. The entire original investment thesis was based on 2 fundamental principles: 1. A fixed maximum supply of 21 million BTC. 2. No rehypothecation. Both principles lost their effectiveness once Wall Street built an entire financial system around Bitcoin: → Cash-settled futures → Perpetual swaps → Options markets → ETFs → Prime broker lending → Wrapped BTC → Total return swaps And from that moment onward, synthetic Bitcoin exposure became effectively UNLIMITED. Not in actual blockchain supply. But in the financial markets that determine the price. Synthetic Float Ratio (SFR). This is the missing metric most people aren't aware of. When synthetic exposure exceeds the available real supply, price stops following demand. It becomes driven by positioning, hedging, and liquidation cascades. Wall Street now has the ability to manufacture Bitcoin exposure and trade against the underlying asset. Their playbook is really simple: 1. Manufacture unlimited paper BTC 2. Short aggressively into rallies 3. Trigger cascading liquidations 4. Cover positions at lower prices 5. Take profit and repeat This isn't simple speculation. It's financial inventory manufacturing. A single real BTC can simultaneously support: → An ETF share → A futures position → A perpetual swap → An options delta → A broker loan → A structured note ALL AT THE SAME TIME. 6 separate financial claims backed by one actual on-chain Bitcoin. That's NOT the decentralized free market people believe they're participating in. That's a new financial system operating under the Bitcoin name. You can ignore this reality, but you cannot escape its consequences. Quick reminder I’ve successfully called every major Bitcoin top and bottom for the past 10+ years. I publicly called the $17K BTC bottom in 2022 and the $126K top in 2025. Then, I called the $57K local bottom in 2026. Missed those calls? Don't worry, you'll get another chance soon. If you haven’t followed yet, now is the best time.

I analyzed eleven New York Times reports on the Jensen Huang story. Most notably, NYT makes the "spy" claim 30 times in these 11 reports. The original report cites unnamed officials who had been "briefed" on the intelligence. Not who had seen it themselves -- but who had been "briefed". This is a game of telephone with plausible deniability. Nobody named. No specific details of the intelligence used to draw the conclusion that the woman was a spy. Anonymous "officials" "briefed". This was used to try to take Jensen Huang down. When that didn't work, journalists resorted to viciously digging up and scandal mongering about Jensen Huang's other alleged affairs. Then he was removed as CEO. Without an investigation. Without due process. And now officials and intelligence agencies are contesting the New York Times characterization. This is unethical. It is unjust. It is an absolute disgrace. If anyone should resign now, it is Nvidia's board who aggressively removed Jensen Huang without an investigation, after he gave decades of his life to make the company what it is. And any investigation that proceeds from here should involved not just the "spy" claim, but the New York Times -- who has engaged in potentially unethical behavior. Jensen Huang deserves due process -- not mob justice. He deserves respect for everything he has done for technology and America -- not a disgraceful removal after anonymous, unsubstantiated allegations, several parties removed from the source.

We’ve partnered with Fanatics Studios, the joint venture between @Fanatics and @OBB, for a multiyear collaboration that will bring Fanatics Studios’ creative and event production capabilities to NBA All-Star, including in-arena events, competitions and original content, starting with NBA All-Star 2027 in Phoenix.