Good screens suddenly became bad. Few theories

QuitePainful

For sure. But before all that, you need to evaluate if these things appear outside of displays - in real world / nature.
Then you need to evaluate if there are sensitivities in the individual.
Then, it needs to be evaluated what worked historically and what not.
Afterwards, the comparison between that data and the new state needs to be made.

Note that if you do not get any eye-strain if you avoid all displays, then displays may have something in it, that triggers issues.
You may switch to a different technology, but your own eye-sight in real-life will always be a more realistic experience than exposure to artificial light emissions.

And yep, To say … "First time …" just feels like an insult.

I gave Chat-GPT a try. Here is what it says:

The post might feel insulting because it appears to make broad assumptions about people’s experiences with screens without acknowledging individual differences. Here are a few reasons why it might come across that way:

1. Assumptions About Sensitivity: It suggests that the user’s discomfort or difficulty might be due to "maladaptive changes" or specific features like True Tone or PWM, which could imply that the person isn’t paying enough attention to these factors or isn’t adaptable.

2. Technical Jargon and Theories: The post dives into technical details and theories without a clear understanding of how they might apply to everyone’s individual experiences. This can make it feel dismissive of personal experiences if they don't align with the stated theories.

3. Focus on Specific Products: Mentioning specific products like the MacBook Pro M1 and iPhones might come off as overly critical or dismissive of those who are using these devices and experiencing discomfort, potentially suggesting that their issues are minor or self-inflicted.

4. Generalization of Experience: The post is framed in a way that could be interpreted as suggesting there’s a “right” or “wrong” way to experience screen discomfort, which may invalidate or overlook individual experiences.

It might help to frame your inquiry more neutrally, acknowledging that different people have unique experiences and emphasizing that you’re interested in a variety of perspectives rather than focusing on specific technical causes or solutions.

async I understand your stance.
However, also try to understand me. The data-points you try to gather are pretty late in the chain of information
If the previous data-points are not assessed, it becomes a pointless exercise, because it will be hugely biased.
We shall not end up in wrong conclusions.

Let me explain in this hypothetical situation:
1. I eat toast from the brand foo.
2. After 6 years, I notice that my throat itches when I eat that particular toast
3. <=== Now you start Interviewing ===>
4. You ask me if it was the first time I ate that particular toast
5. I say no, I ate it for 6 years
6. You ask me if I ever tried a whole grain toast

Do you see the issue?
- We need to make sure the ingredients stayed consistent
- We need to make sure the health stayed consistent
- We need to make sure the dining ware stayed consistent
- And so much more!

To have the audacity to ask for a full-grain toast, even if the user didn't choose to, for trying to fix the situation, is dismissive, misleading and not scientific at all.
We need to make sure that all details are assessed. Not just those few - late data-points.

QuitePainful I did not omit it.
Specifically, 2. After 6 years, I notice that my throat itches when I eat that particular toast

- It could have been that the user became allergic ( yep this can happen over time )
- It could have been that the ingredients changed.

bluetail I must have misunderstood.

Wouldn't 2. After 6 years, I tried a different kind of toast that made my throat itch and now my throat itches when I eat my usual toast as well exemplify the premise better, making it reasonable to ask questions about the different kind of toast that was tried and that seems to have caused the change?

If a change like this occurred spontaneously without any clear cause, you would have a point, but async is talking about a situation where a plausible external cause does exist, namely exposure to a different screen.

I feel like we're veering a bit off topic here.

QuitePainful Oh, thats helpful. And rest assured, we are on-topic.
The first difficulty in the questions asked was to understand the intent properly.

This would fulfill the criteria to develop an allergy or sensitivity.
It is well known that consuming some food can cause allergies and cross-allergies you didn't had before.

To name one example I have read online: Exposure to latex can lead to latex allergy, and make you allergic to bananas, kiwis […]

ocean10

I think this happens due to eyes fatigue; they become slightly less sensitive to external stimuli, including PWM. In the case of PWM, the eye adjusts to the average brightness (between the states of the screen being "off" and "on", with the average brightness being calculated based on the time spent in each of these states and the amplitude). However, the brightness fluctuations caused by PWM deviate from this "average brightness," and the eye is not prepared for such intense light, which affects it. But since these fluctuations are brief, the eye doesn't have time to understand what's happening and adjust. If the eyes are very tired, they may become less sensitive to such brightness fluctuations. This applies not only to PWM but also to any other strain on the eyes. Lately, I've been trying to make Linux more comfortable for my eyes, and in the evening, it always seems like it's getting easier to work. But in the morning, it becomes clear that this isn't quite the case. Therefore, I've stopped trusting my eyes in this matter and have bought an HDMI recorder for these purposes.

bluetail

Editing EDID can potentially affect some aspects of monitor performance, such as resolution, refresh rate, and other display parameters. However, disabling dithering directly through EDID editing is unlikely. This process is usually controlled by the graphics card and its drivers (I don't mean FRC here), not the monitor.

But I think it is possible to influence this indirectly by specifying the number of bits per channel or the output signal format (if the driver for some reason has incorrectly determined them) in EDID. However, in this case, the internal logic of the driver should assume disabling dithering for the given number of bits per channel or signal format. I can't say how viable this case is.

As for PWM, I have not encountered cases where this could be done through EDID editing.