A few people have asked that, so maybe. Another thought was you could tweet an image to the Twitter bot and have it tweet back the result, but then your image is out there for the world to see, so maybe that's not as good.

If you create a frontend, it may be a good idea to add a button for buying a print (which you could do through one of the many online services available). Some of these look very nice and I'm considering printing something like this on a canvas to hang on the wall.

All the +1 in the world for this. I've been browsing the Twitter bot for a while just thinking "some of these are great; I'd happily hang one".

absolutely +1 for this

I was about to create such a website a couple of years ago, but isn't this too much computational expensive to be a free service? It's going to make people wait a lot if the service hits HN or something like that. Or maybe my code was too much unoptimized and it's possible to train the images in a quite faster fashion after all. Anyway would be great to have such a site.

EDIT: Now I checked better your implementation and is very different, and indeed, can be made a lot faster. What I (and others before me) do is to have a fixed set of polygons and move, rotate, change color in order to find the best arrangement. In your case instead you add shapes incrementally in order to lower the error.

Is it pure Go? Could you compile with GopherJS and do the processing all client side?

That would be cool. It is pure Go...

I could see this becoming super popular in some twitter circles, though.

You could also make it an app the way Prisma did...

Grab primitivepics.com NOW.

Also available is primitive.pics. I'm surprised no one has grabbed these yet...

That's a terrible name if he's planning to monetize this tho.

why?

I assume because "primitive" generally has negative connotations. (Don't try to make rational arguments about that doesn't apply here or how obvious it is that it's not the "bad" sort of primitive. We're talking about marketing here. Rational arguments are a category error.) I'm not creative enough to come up with a positive, just some more neutral ideas that you would have the opportunity to shape, like Shapify (taken by other things though), something with "simplify", something with "fun" maybe ("fun up your photos!").

And to me, Shapify is just another generic "web 2.0" name. Lost in the sea of a million other "ify" domains. The point here is that they should at least claim the domain name for their product, regardless if that is going to be the actual public facing product.

This is another one of those "your tone suggests you disagree with me, but you're just repeating my point back at me" posts. I told you "Shapify" was a neutral word that you can pour your own connotations into. A lot of brands are. What's a "Cisco"? What's a "Nike" in a country where most people won't get the classical allusion? What's a "Coke"?

Those brands aren't generic "ify" names that sound like they came from a domain name generator. Primitive sounds like a pretty good company name to me. There is already a skateboarding company of the same name that does well.

You could accept DMs as well