I don’t understand how “gamer style” is a thing.

Like, in general? Lots of non-functional molded plastic angular stuff with unnecessary holes, crevices, lights, and styling slapped on stuff. Let me do a quick search for “gamer mouse”.

searches

Yeah. That’s a nice example.

The ROG Phone itself isn’t a particularly over-the-top example of that, but I don’t really want the styling.

It isn’t a deal-breaker, just that I’d rather not have it; for me it was a negative.

If you’re old enough to remember Winamp skins from the early 2000s

I am, and I agree that many of those did have similar over-the-top styling…and I don’t want to buy physical hardware that looks like it.

I generally just want understated hardware without a lot of styling on it on all my computer hardware. I’m sure that there are people who do want something that looks more like the above, and that’s fine, but it’s not an aesthetic that I personally much like.

If I had to guess, part of the problem is probably “bigger” hardware moving into their space.

Like, phones have a lot of limitations for playing “heavyweight”, PC-style games:

• Small battery.

• Small screen.

• Limited ability to dissipate heat.

• Really limited space and the hardware tradeoffs that come with that.

• Touchscreen controls, even with accelerometer, aren’t ideal for a lot of games, especially PC or console ports.

For a lot of those, if you can manage to lug a laptop with you, you’re probably better off.

Then you have stuff like the Steam Deck and a bunch of similar larger-than-phone game-oriented platforms show up, and that eats even further into your market. Yeah, okay, a ROG Phone is smaller and lighter than a Steam Deck, but if you’re trying to deal with touchscreen controls by lugging along external control stuff, then you’re sacrificing some of that mobility:

https://www.androidcentral.com/phones/asus-rog-phone-9-pro-is-the-best-gaming-phone-and-its-here-in-the-us

I mean, I’m sure that there’s still a niche for heavyweight-game phone gaming, but it’s gonna have other parties eating away at the edges, narrowing it. You gotta want to play heavyweight games, not be willing to use larger-than-phone hardware, but spend a substantial amount of money on your phone (especially given the short EOL on the ROG phone) to have that ability. My guess is that some people who won’t use other hardware for gaming is because they have a phone and are price-sensitive enough to not want to get additional hardware platforms to just play games, so “users willing to spend a high premium on phone hardware to be able to game” may be a poor match to that market.

Well…darn. Aside from the “gamer” styling and their unusually short years-of-support policy, I was actually kind of interested in their ROG phones, as they have both a substantial amount of memory and large batteries, and had them on the “possibles” list for my next phone. I don’t care much about the gaming aspect, but there weren’t a lot of other options with the above characteristics.

I’m using Debian trixie on two systems with (newer) AMD hardware:

ROCm 7.0.1.70001-42~24.04 on an RX 7900 XTX

ROCm 7.0.2.70002-56~24.04 on an AMD AI Max 395+.

No problem. It was an interesting question that made me curious too.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30869297/difference-between-memfree-and-memavailable

Rik van Riel’s comments when adding MemAvailable to /proc/meminfo:

/proc/meminfo: MemAvailable: provide estimated available memory

Many load balancing and workload placing programs check /proc/meminfo to estimate how much free memory is available. They generally do this by adding up “free” and “cached”, which was fine ten years ago, but is pretty much guaranteed to be wrong today.

It is wrong because Cached includes memory that is not freeable as page cache, for example shared memory segments, tmpfs, and ramfs, and it does not include reclaimable slab memory, which can take up a large fraction of system memory on mostly idle systems with lots of files.

Currently, the amount of memory that is available for a new workload, without pushing the system into swap, can be estimated from MemFree, Active(file), Inactive(file), and SReclaimable, as well as the “low” watermarks from /proc/zoneinfo.

However, this may change in the future, and user space really should not be expected to know kernel internals to come up with an estimate for the amount of free memory.

It is more convenient to provide such an estimate in /proc/meminfo. If things change in the future, we only have to change it in one place.

Looking at the htop source:

https://github.com/htop-dev/htop/blob/main/MemoryMeter.c

   /* we actually want to show "used + shared + compressed" */
   double used = this->values[MEMORY_METER_USED];
   if (isPositive(this->values[MEMORY_METER_SHARED]))
      used += this->values[MEMORY_METER_SHARED];
   if (isPositive(this->values[MEMORY_METER_COMPRESSED]))
      used += this->values[MEMORY_METER_COMPRESSED];

   written = Meter_humanUnit(buffer, used, size);

It’s adding used, shared, and compressed memory, to get the amount actually tied up, but disregarding cached memory, which, based on the above comment, is problematic, since some of that may not actually be available for use.

top, on the other hand, is using the kernel’s MemAvailable directly.

https://gitlab.com/procps-ng/procps/-/blob/master/src/free.c

	printf(" %11s", scale_size(MEMINFO_GET(mem_info, MEMINFO_MEM_AVAILABLE, ul_int), args.exponent, flags & FREE_SI, flags & FREE_HUMANREADABLE));

In short: You probably want to trust /proc/meminfo’s MemAvailable, (which is what top will show), and htop is probably giving a misleadingly-low number.

If oomkiller starts killing processes, then you’re running out of memory.

Well, you could want to not dig into swap.

There might be some way to make use of it.

Linux apparently can use VRAM as a swap target:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Swap_on_video_RAM

So you could probably take an Nvidia H200 (141 GB memory) and set it as a high-priority swap partition, say.

Normally, a typical desktop is liable to have problems powering an H200 (600W max TDP), but that’s with all the parallel compute hardware active, and I assume that if all you’re doing is moving stuff in and out of memory, it won’t use much power, same as a typical gaming-oriented GPU.

That being said, it sounds like the route on the Arch Wiki above is using vramfs, which is a FUSE filesystem, which means that it’s running in userspace rather than kernelspace, which probably means that it will have more overhead than is really necessary.

EDIT: I think that a lot will come down to where research goes. If it turns out that someone figures out that changing the hardware (having a lot more memory, adding new operations, whatever) dramatically improves performance for AI stuff, I suspect that current hardware might get dumped sooner rather than later as datacenters shift to new hardware. Lot of unknowns there that nobody will really have the answers to yet.

EDIT2: Apparently someone made a kernel-based implementation for Nvidia cards to use the stuff directly as CPU-addressable memory, not swap.

https://github.com/magneato/pseudoscopic

In holography, a pseudoscopic image reverses depth—what was near becomes far, what was far becomes near. This driver performs the same reversal in compute architecture: GPU memory, designed to serve massively parallel workloads, now serves the CPU as directly-addressable system RAM.

Why? Because sometimes you have 16GB of HBM2 sitting idle while your neural network inference is memory-bound on the CPU side. Because sometimes constraints breed elegance. Because we can.

Pseudoscopic exposes NVIDIA Tesla/Datacenter GPU VRAM as CPU-addressable memory through Linux’s Heterogeneous Memory Management (HMM) subsystem. Not swap. Not a block device. Actual memory with struct page backing, transparent page migration, and full kernel integration.

I’d guess that that’ll probably perform substantially better.

It looks like they presently only target older cards, though.

This world is getting dumber and dumber.

Ehhh…I dunno.

Go back 20 years and we had similar articles, just about the Web, because it was new to a lot of people then.

searches

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/internet-killed-my-daughter/28397087.html

Internet killed my daughter

https://archive.ph/pJ8Dw

Were Simon and Natasha victims of the web?

https://archive.ph/i9syP

Predators tell children how to kill themselves

And before that, I remember video games.

It happens periodically — something new shows up, and then you’ll have people concerned about any potential harm associated with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic

A moral panic, also called a social panic, is a widespread feeling of fear that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society.[1][2][3] It is “the process of arousing social concern over an issue”,[4] usually elicited by moral entrepreneurs and sensational mass media coverage, and exacerbated by politicians and lawmakers.[1][4] Moral panic can give rise to new laws aimed at controlling the community.[5]

Stanley Cohen, who developed the term, states that moral panic happens when “a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests”.[6] While the issues identified may be real, the claims “exaggerate the seriousness, extent, typicality and/or inevitability of harm”.[7] Moral panics are now studied in sociology and criminology, media studies, and cultural studies.[2][8] It is often academically considered irrational (see Cohen’s model of moral panic, below).

Examples of moral panic include the belief in widespread abduction of children by predatory pedophiles[9][10][11] and belief in ritual abuse of women and children by Satanic cults.[12] Some moral panics can become embedded in standard political discourse,[2] which include concepts such as the Red Scare[13] and terrorism.[14]

Media technologies

Main article: Media panic

The advent of any new medium of communication produces anxieties among those who deem themselves as protectors of childhood and culture. Their fears are often based on a lack of knowledge as to the actual capacities or usage of the medium. Moralizing organizations, such as those motivated by religion, commonly advocate censorship, while parents remain concerned.[8][40][41]

According to media studies professor Kirsten Drotner:[42]

[E]very time a new mass medium has entered the social scene, it has spurred public debates on social and cultural norms, debates that serve to reflect, negotiate and possibly revise these very norms.… In some cases, debate of a new medium brings about – indeed changes into – heated, emotional reactions … what may be defined as a media panic.

Recent manifestations of this kind of development include cyberbullying and sexting.[8]

I’m not sure that we’re doing better than people in the past did on this sort of thing, but I’m not sure that we’re doing worse, either.

I’m kind of surprised that it costs $2 million to put a new tank in. I’d have thought it’d be less.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Didn't_Start_the_Fire

“We Didn’t Start the Fire” is a song written by American musician Billy Joel.

Joel conceived the idea for the song when he had just turned 40. He was in a recording studio and met a 21-year-old friend of Sean Lennon who said “It’s a terrible time to be 21!”. Joel replied: “Yeah, I remember when I was 21 – I thought it was an awful time and we had Vietnam, and y’know, drug problems, and civil rights problems and everything seemed to be awful”. The friend replied: “Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it’s different for you. You were a kid in the fifties and everybody knows that nothing happened in the fifties”. Joel retorted: “Wait a minute, didn’t you hear of the Korean War or the Suez Canal Crisis?” Joel later said those headlines formed the basic framework for the song.[4]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFTLKWw542g

🎵 We didn’t start the fire 🎵
🎵 It was always burning since the world’s been turning 🎵
🎵 We didn’t start the fire 🎵
🎵 No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it 🎵

!patientgamers@sh.itjust.works looked smug as hell. They’d been telling everyone for years.

Summary created by Smart Answers AI

chuckles

And why Bash and not another shell?

I chose it for my example because I happen to use it. You could use another shell, sure.

Should we consider “throwaway” anything that supports interactive mode of your daily driver you chose in your default terminal prompt?

Interactive mode is a good case for throwaway code, but one-off scripts would also work.

The point I’m making is that bash is optimized for quickly writing throwaway code. It doesn’t matter if the code written blows up in some case other than the one you’re using. You don’t need to handle edge cases that don’t apply to the one time that you will run the code. I write lots of bash code that doesn’t handle a bunch of edge cases, because for my one-off use, that edge case doesn’t arise. Similarly, if an LLMs is generating code that misses some edge case, if it’s a situation that will never arise, and that may not be a problem.

EDIT: I think maybe that you’re misunderstanding me as saying “all bash code is throwaway”, which isn’t true. I’m just using it as an example where throwaway code is a very common, substantial use case.

I don’t know: it’s not just the outputs posing a risk, but also the tools themselves

Yeah, that’s true. Poisoning the training corpus of models is at least a potential risk. There’s a whole field of AI security stuff out there now aimed at LLM security.

it shouldn’t require additional tools, checking for such common flaws.

Well, we are using them today for human programmers, so… :-)

No problem; I remember being delighted to learn that there was a name for the thing, years back.

Also, one other comment regarding the “change away from mechanical toggle”. If you got the machine pre-built, you may never have noticed this, but on ATX motherboards, there’s a set of pins which you fit the power and reset switch wires onto.

I mean, you can plug whatever you feel like onto those pins and stick your power and reset buttons wherever you feel like, if you don’t like the position of the existing case switch. It’s just a momentary switch. You can grab replacement ones that aren’t built into a case:

https://www.amazon.com/Warmstor-2-Pack-Computer-Supply-27-inch/dp/B074XDTVN1

Or even just get your own switches and connect the plug and wires to whatever sort of momentary switch you want. Amazon or Mouser or DigiKey will have all sorts of momentary switches.

Security is where the gap shows most clearly

So, this is an area where I’m also pretty skeptical. It might be possible to address some of the security issues by making minor shifts away from a pure-LLM system. There are (conventional) security code-analysis tools out there, stuff like Coverity. Like, maybe if one says “all of the code coming out of this LLM gets rammed through a series of security-analysis tools”, you catch enough to bring the security flaws down to a tolerable level.

One item that they highlight is the problem of API keys being committed. I’d bet that there’s already software that will run on git-commit hooks that will try to red-flag those, for example. Yes, in theory an LLM could embed them into code in some sort of obfuscated form that slips through, but I bet that it’s reasonable to have heuristics that can catch most of that, that will be good-enough, and that such software isn’t terribly difficult to write.

But in general, I think that LLMs and image diffusion models are, in their present form, more useful for generating output that a human will consume than that a CPU will consume. CPUs are not tolerant of errors in programming languages. Humans often just need an approximately-right answer, to cue our brains, which itself has the right information to construct the desired mental state. An oil painting isn’t a perfect rendition of the real world, but it’s good enough, as it can hint to us what the artist wanted to convey by cuing up the appropriate information about the world that we have in our brains.

This Monet isn’t a perfect rendition of the world. But because we have knowledge in our brain about what the real world looks like, there’s enough information in the painting to cue up the right things in our head to let us construct a mental image.

Ditto for rough concept art. Similarly, a diffusion model can get an image approximately right — some errors often just aren’t all that big a deal.

But a lot of what one is producing when programming is going to be consumed by a CPU that doesn’t work the way that a human brain does. A significant error rate isn’t good enough; the CPU isn’t going to patch over flaws and errors itself using its knowledge of what the program should do.

EDIT:

I’d bet that there’s already software that will run on git-commit hooks that will try to red-flag those, for example.

Yes. Here are instructions for setting up trufflehog to run on git pre-commit hooks to do just that.

EDIT2: Though you’d need to disable this trufflehog functionality and have some out-of-band method for flagging false positives, or an LLM could learn to bypass the security-auditing code by being trained on code that overrides false positives:

Add trufflehog:ignore comments on lines with known false positives or risk-accepted findings

I keep seeing the “it’s good for prototyping” argument they post here, in real life.

There are real cases where bugs aren’t a huge deal.

Take shell scripts. Bash is designed to make it really fast to write throwaway, often one-line software that can accomplish a lot with minimal time.

Bash is not, as a programming language, very optimized for catching corner cases, or writing highly-secure code, or highly-maintainable code. The great majority of bash code that I have written is throwaway code, stuff that I will use once and not even bother to save. It doesn’t have to handle all situations or be hardened. It just has to fill that niche of code that can be written really quickly. But that doesn’t mean that it’s not valuable. I can imagine generated code with some bugs not being such a huge problem there. If it runs once and appears to work for the inputs in that particular scenario, that may be totally fine.

Or, take test code. I’m not going to spend a lot of time making test code perfect. If it fails, it’s probably not the end of the world. There are invariably cases that I won’t have written test code for. “Good enough” is often just fine there.

And it might be possible to, instead of (or in addition to) having human-written commit messages, generate descriptions of commits or something down the line for someone browsing code.

I still feel like I’m stretching, though. Like…I feel like what people are envisioning is some kind of self-improving AI software package, or just letting an LLM go and having it pump out a new version of Microsoft Office. And I’m deeply skeptical that we’re going to get there just on the back of LLMs. I think that we’re going to need more-sophisticated AI systems.

I remember working on one large, multithreaded codebase where a developer who isn’t familiar with or isn’t following the thread-safety constraints would create an absolute maintenance nightmare for others, where you’re going to spend way more time tracking down and fixing breakages induced than you saved by them not spending time coming up to speed on the constraints that their code needs to conform to. And the existing code-generation systems just aren’t really in a great position to come up to speed on those constraints. Part of what a programmer does is, when writing code, is to look at the human-language requirements, and identify that there are undefined cases and go back and clarify the requirement with the user, or use real-world knowledge to make reasonable calls. Training an LLM to map from an English-language description to code is creating a system that just doesn’t have the capability to do that sort of thing.

But, hey, we’ll see.

I apparently actually did two of these on different occasions, using different, restricted Unicode character ranges (ones that only look at the value of the character as a whole, no subpixel rendering). Can’t find the (newer) color one, but the black-and-white one:

    ░                                                                         
  ░░░░░░░                                                                     
 ░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░                                                                  
 ░▒▓▓▓▒▒▒░░░░░                                                                
 ░▒▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░                                                      ░░░    
 ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░                                              ░░░░░░░░░░░░░
 ░▒▓▓███▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░                                         ░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░
 ░▒▓▓▓████▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▓▒▒░░                                 ░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▒▒░ 
  ░▒▓▓▓███▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░             ░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒░  
   ░▒▓▓▓█▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░   
    ▒▓▓▓██▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓██▓▓▓▒░    
    ░▒▓▓▓████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓█▓▓▓▒░     
    ░▒▒▓▓▓████▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░       
    ░░▒▓▓▓▓██▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓█▓▓▓░░        
     ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓███▓▓▓▒░          
      ░▒▓▓▓▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░▒▒▓▓██▓▓▓▓▒░           
        ▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░            
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▓▓▓▒░             
      ░▒▒▒░░░░▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒░              
     ░░▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒░               
    ░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░▒░░               
    ░░▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▓▓▓████▓▓▒▒░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒░░░░▒░░               
   ░▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░░░▒▒▓▓▓▓▒▒░░░░░░░░░▒▓▓████▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░               
  ░░▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒░░░▒▒▓▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░▒▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░▒░                
    ░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░                 
     ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░▒▒▒▒░                 
       ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▒▒▒░░▒▒▒░                
        ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▒▒▒▒░░░░░░  ░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░                
         ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▓▓▒▒░░░░░░      ░░░░▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒░                
           ░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▓▓▓▒░░  ░░░░░▒▒▒░░   ░░▒▒░░░▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░                 
            ░▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░░   ░░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░░  ░░▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░                   
                 ░▒▒▓▓▓▓▒░   ░▓▓█▓▓▓▒▒▓▓▓▒░  ░▒▒▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░                     
                    ▒▒▓▒▒▒░░░▒▓███████▓██▓░   ░▒▓▓▓▒░░                        
                      ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓████▓▓████▓░   ░▒▒▒░                           
                        ░▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓██████▓▒▒░░░░                                
                          ░▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░░                                 
                            ▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░░                                    
                              ░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░                                      

Is generated by the program with this uuencoded source:

begin 644 unicode_image.tar.xz
M_3=Z6%H```3FUK1&`@`A`18```!T+^6CX"?_!IM=`":8269IV=F-Y,!%M1>4
MZX(9LR,YMG1:D2XCM%DZ,0N4%>'\;I?0D"7/H:OI15<M6G@8HO/[&((J'=B.
MXY\G/[7D"Y)B$O)IC]DM9Y@^\4T?'9(.Z.4+7IDF/T0&\7`M5+G#=C!?(>(U
M+-C2%PZ!"(Q'Z_/D^%"[PVKX:A:OKH5WF?AQ=CD_AAS]<3<THTMC0S8FG\<A
MZ;A-_9H?)5S'YG5A?0WUQ7FR0+IS\0AEUYY9QFMY?"$);\U%_R0NK(ZZ/Y&J
MVA;@#O-P.6W8PW']0U"<S'NHB=.(/)OX[<1&UF@M8+GXPGVFQB_+K/WD01ZO
MO#+E!CK;^`V-WGH^?0V5M!IK[KR&]`IR<>6D+ONPJT6E\CZJ^KKZ,W?3O"2K
M!/GHQ&TDN';;P#UC;)+HRPH$`_8JM#ZV`\I6=,PO=U#S33IZ=R!K2IF]\1D@
M*@I6;)=1P[3ICJ%,C5VTH^%^^N7(`)5NO*-SG)Y`QA_WK>PA8;TJ+X2)EV?3
MI.G"[*>WWDZ7\Q_8`@,?X8C9YSMNGQ.S79!10SGB!PGY<3)L+A>\T4NE3RCH
M@$<!]40^I5;'[)@>$KCW3*:VMQ")"FQ!"L?^:Y5K)WM]*CV<",@L38:E&'G;
MOH/\?B8-H-/5$-+1`SZ2O6RHY>T@2+Q"LM7T32<P'/M;:&`9G%<:2]0W95K<
M\.;8"EQMW`_,%NF[4)3]`F-BE^_T2,`,VV:G?3TUJ"IH\A@>7Y8:?5[I8HAX
M/S[+K[U+U);"B>&TTWB[]4K_N9HNW6P5\,!8G[BS*%\3<$#RM"O`6C#I1>3W
ME/8D\";AO1[@@M<^$07W%./W$^^MXKWV/QE?(SEU3GAF"?/TXQ_1N>#/)-;8
M<MT]?:XBQTJ%9'[+D!X/9^"U.Y*2A(8A/AJ\!K^V\)9>''<,=_M*GQ;D4XU&
M0EL_A7==:2!F6+.18],W)'0*A8VHHT@F\^+U@*=PAW&]_UDA'O3HL,)67*56
M:4QHF]DC7*EMI@?8=/,8;'O4[2W^#V!$L.(O\+@E"I[>5AF7V].]DSR0?>4E
MX,HXX%S-A'V'+F)3(0_FX[O!VNO&D/BL`T<!(LJ,(@3!S8LJ[><9CHP*Z!1N
M*W=F7"R-"ZZ_7"_NQ:8M=&RU\7`Z`<J>2YY>W2B\R7!YX(:UE+7?[1HLZ6?B
M_$Z<[I3[+!'?["<`BV0HHVNVZ$?*E!CLQ,Q'U$5$IQ?#B#+P)WE/$$-*'U<E
M%+7[;;^I\)F++WU`\\BL@X5,*B+]OLWQ&=W!,3*4_5Z0'R\2N/\];P>]W2<(
M-7Z3$YL3&6;-"*NTT2_Z1P=4">JZT,0Y$Q`L;RU@2\X!6>NA6D:5#HOIP#H]
MH)2I8$WFSU,1M9OC73J.1T1-YWD[%EH?1E*H#MV/[+5HSKGU.-%-'Z)QI=$\
MV>24Q6&KMA*-=L#[#I[2'0$86N)&8E/==`F@,S#5,`)(-KDT6A9IK-/%6OA@
M@FI$$#7G>&.Z!8[?8:F==P>HX>WF&.?(9V6^WM`J[CVD`L]9<&\6P_U?*WN`
MLI*_M*H;SP58M&#X!>*U*^J*XO@UT"&SIGH1%(K-=7DN@=HD6`S2EET,60JV
MI_\%)%6Q_^3CW_5`HQ;G084_7J0'F9DDH*%`SY*.D1BP`"D_QO=5,F?$-HAG
M_FP7H+LUTX`^%F-[SV(C'N*+AXE=&!+'OT$)RYGQ/HX,L8W(D%G9J=P!6+*$
M)F20)=%>9ZI).Z0`I'T/OT#SUR_:(O0U1*2-:,\D0S52^NI?HL69"POCNH&X
M_HXLQZB3EL-Z<)4.!<<BDJX3H"Q`L'&"RLO/%]17EV.5R@/$,%GYE#U(,Z'.
M6#]?M?@0VYB%WU2-4E:Z&9RN,"SCQAYJ70='?0`L5JC6GG#:1BG]DBCY;N)<
M>[;>JU-P]W=*RQG_KX;[>Y-0O.>_BS[M!=3Y#98EA`S8J/\1S=Z..*RC^;+U
M!.(#>E-V^?_+/M323Q,+EM-95M%CT#G[XO0FH/`.&`__EU<3\=+#>7?FR*NY
M9MA;$1+KD8?V@Y8XE7`(*;.N\KEF1]T4!OYS1+%#*S9&[0-#E"FRGA^\L[^A
M\76@2CMV<J_S92KW%;UO$.=R!3!P]OD.WD@*ZE(.;>H)8L]IMC;<YHPNH343
MY,JGKBM7M:!:S]$UJ7Y-/A'>Z]^7LV*Y.]N\MN_#%%%>)IH_A_:G46]+E.M;
MUA@I>99IP916P;7A48N3VF+;&!__1Q<QF8AU`XF-LJ./^6J+@+JCLICOF=I-
M.U"KKV.._JR/;P(````4=99=LD1P/P`!MPV`4```*JOOO;'$9_L"``````19
!6@``
`
end

I’ve also seen various programs that use the Braille Unicode characters for higher-resolution bitmap rendering, like mapscii, and I suspect that someone’s probably written software to convert to that.