I'm impressed. The imbalance between encoding and decoding speeds seems a useful strategy when you are building special purpose hardware and software applications.
It seems if you're making a central source of data that is able to tolerate a much slower write process versus a quick read process that this approach can be advantageous.
Maybe using this core method in a problem space which maps to the radio/signal broadcast process of many receivers but a central source of truth.
I can imagine if you had an information base that changed slowly or which was pre-processed in a batch fashion, that it could use this method.
It doesn't even need for the central data to be decoded into a graphical image.
I think this radio model could map the problem space for a centralized system that maintained a list of items and their prices which needed to be broadcast to the retail outlets on a regular basis.
Or a common cache storage to make some complex data manipulation calculations centrally performed available to a large number of satellites who just need the end results but do not have the need to do local calculation.
There are no private messages on HN. This, and your comments in the last 3 months look (AI) generated, which is prohibited in the guidelines[0] but also loathed by the community. Can only speculate, though.
Dave is a brave chap, and posts his personal phone number in his profile. You might be able to contact him that way, but, personally, I wouldn't. I don't think it's really appropriate. I'd say that your comment is sufficient, and not inflammatory.
But I do agree, the comment smells "AIsh." It may not be, however, if this is his standard writing style. I have been accused of being a "bot," for stuff I wrote ten years ago. It's my observation, that people tend to accuse any lengthy comments of being LLM-generated.
I'm trying to learn why I have been downvoted. Please reply or send me a private message so I can learn.