Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost all of the other ways are dramatically superior, for humans Oklab and the Munsell colour system are very obviously far more intuitive at low numbers of quantised steps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MunsellColorWheel.sv... To be blunt: your system blithely ignores the color space, gamma curves, and human perception. There’s like… entire textbooks written on the topic of optimal encoding of hues given…
This is quite the unhinged and accusatory attempt at uncalled-for dismissal. What's with the attack?
It’s factual and references the state of the art — which the OP couldn’t even be bothered to Google.
How is it uncalled for? It’s here! In the public sphere! The OP published it and is showing it off!
Their grand contribution to color theory: divide a nonlinear, unspecified encoding by ten.
channel / 10
Something worthy of HN front page would be a tiny NN that optimally allocates perceptually uniform color divisions such that +1 or -1 was always consistently what an artist would expect. That would be cool and worthy of a website and a discussion on a tech forum.
Sometimes we need to encourage something hopelessly naive, but I put my limit somewhere around… this.
Anyway, why do you care if I dismiss the OP's "contribution" out of hand? The OP doesn't care about his "work" in the slightest! To quote: "Or something like that roughly... It doesn't matter if it's not perfect."