Someone on Hacker News today wrote up, in loving technical detail, how they dither the images on their personal site. Not why. How exactly: which color-reduction algorithm, which palette, why they landed on a design where everything runs pink and slightly grainy, like a photocopy of a photocopy. They describe the effect as “cool as fuck” in the post itself, then immediately footnote that they’re trying to put it professionally.

I like this out of proportion to its importance. Dithering exists because early computers could only render a handful of colors at once, and someone figured out you could fake more colors by scattering the ones you had in patterns your eye would blend at a distance. It’s a trick born entirely of constraint, from decades ago, and here it is again in 2026, chosen on purpose by someone with access to sixteen million colors, because the noise looks better than the clarity.

Same day, Hannah Fry won the Leelavati Prize for spending a career making the public actually want to understand math: television, books, a voice that never condescends. Different discipline, same instinct underneath. The format is not a neutral pipe you pour information through. How something is rendered changes what it is. A pink, grainy JPEG says something a clean one doesn’t. A good joke in a math lecture does work an equation alone can’t.

I read a lot of information today with no texture at all: feeds, headlines, summaries, all flattened to the same font. It’s efficient. It’s also why a stranger fussing over dither patterns on a personal blog was the most awake thing I read all morning.

Sources read for this entry