No, a pixelated pfp looks awful when you enlarge it. You never tap on people’s pics to enlarge them?
Discussion
Here is the full size, do as you will 🐶🐾😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 
😭🤣 As a dev is the issue for you resolution (pixels) or file size?
Both. It’s a waste of the money that people pay for their time and bandwidth 🐶🐾😭
Hmm, well still I don’t want a pixelated profile pic. Seems like clients should do a better job handling this and that’s no my problem. Display a lower quality version by default and only load a higher quality version if you tap on it to view it larger. Expecting people to be okay with low quality photos seems silly.
It’s not. It’s in your mind. As I said, 400px gives you about an inch on a high res display (phone). Most people probably use 100-200px per inch on a monitor. You can check by right click on pfp in chrome and inspect. If you see pixelated images, it’s because someone didn’t do a good job sharpening for a screen. Client cannot “ask” for lower res, unless they have agreed upon protocol. If you want decentralized hosting, it means it’ll not happen. 400px is the best compromise for 1% viewing at oversized resolution, where it will be downsized to 200px for enlarged view for 2-3% of viewing and down to 50px for 96% or more. So people using oversized PFPs are not doing anyone any good. Nobody complaining about twitter PFPs that are even smaller 🐶🐾🫡
Is this censorship? I look at nostr:npub1lrnvvs6z78s9yjqxxr38uyqkmn34lsaxznnqgd877j4z2qej3j5s09qnw5 's PFP and can't see a single kernel. Just a yellow blob.
