hellofunk

> I suspect the vast majority of people who pay for the upgrades are businesses or consultants where the Apple upgrade price is fairly negligible compared to cost of their professional time.

Yes exactly. The premium on my time has been gradually edging out in my priorities. I'd rather pay a little extra to have something already there than spend the same amount in my own time instead. It's a fair tradeoff. "But there's not much time involved, it's a ripoff," say many. But there is time involved for people who don't regularly upgrade computers. Figuring out what to buy, the best place to buy it, then the process of doing the upgrade yourself (if it's possible) is not a trivial amount of time unless you do this often enough.

Let's say you can upgrade a hard drive in 2 hours total, which is conservative -- the total time of researching what to buy, reading how to install it, ordering it, opening the package, putting in the drive, configuring the stuff you need to do, if necessary. Even at two hours, for my wage, that's about $200 of my time. I'd rather just spend the $200 or even a little more to not deal with it. And in reality, for me at least, it would take more than 2 hours of my time all-in anyway.

Because OpenCL and SIMD are not the same thing?

I guess I’ll cast my contrarian vote to say I might start using this for a while as my first look at the HN front page. I like seeing snippets of the article before clicking through to read it. In fact, I like that idea so much, I think a site that cached quite a bit more of the article so I could just read all the front page articles in a row would be pretty rad.

> obvious use case is AAA games running in your browser, but I think once we've got 80-90% of native speeds on the web

The thing about AAA games is that it is not just about the speed but also the memory requirements. Currently there is no way to load the many GB of memory required for many games in a browser.

That same clip has been going around for nearly a decade. Shame there’s little more to show for the software; I think that’s telling in its own right.

For example, the phrase goes back at least as far as Shakespeare.

Of course the phrase itself existed long before the documentary.

Looks to be missing quite a lot of offensive content from the searches I tried, things that bit me in the past.

I’m one of the wokest people I know and I really enjoy debating my non-woke friends, it’s very entertaining to me to watch them squirm under the pressure of my wit, which is like a forceful wall of the sea.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. That was indeed not obvious to me the way they worded it.

> If we did a mass testing campaign on 300 million Americans right now, I think the rate of asymptomatic infection would be somewhere between 50% and 80% of cases

Wow that’s incredible. 200 million Americans could have the virus.

The re-frame docs and "marketing" speak, like on its front github page, would do very well to remove a lot of the self-congratulatory tone, frankly. A lot of it reads like someone very impressed with themselves rather than text about how to use an actual tool.

I personally prefer reagent directly over re-frame. I've heard some Clojure developers express frustrations with the typical idioms that Re-frame promotes. I can see some value in how it organizes some things, but you can do the same thing directly with Reagent far more quickly. The difference is that in Re-frame you only really have one way of doing things, and that consistency can be good for a team. But it does require extra development time.

The most interesting thing I’ve learned yet from this, and I’m not quite done with it, is that you can pass a constant (let) to a function, which can accept it as mutable, and therefore actually mutate data that the caller thinks cannot be mutated! I’m not sure how I feel about this.

Case you’re curious, Nubank has done the same thing for the Elixir language!

http://blog.plataformatec.com.br/2020/01/important-informati...

The discussion about shadowing variables doesn’t seem to make a very good case to me about this feature. Why would you want to introduce all those variables on the stack, each of a different type (even if they have the same name, presumably they are new pieces of stack memory)? Why not just mutate an existing variable each time?

There’s a reason why several very popular modern languages made the deliberate choice of not offering inheritance as a language feature.

I was very curious, so I found this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitwig/comments/4c2zoh/what_program...

Sounds like it’s probably not much of a Java app.

I wonder if most of these are now using QML or if they’re primarily adopting the older widget style.

That's fascinating, I didn't realize Maya was non-commercial Qt. I wonder why; Autodesk can certainly afford a license.

The license for QT has been evolving quite a lot over the last year or two, which makes many developers very nervous to use it without a paid license. Have you seen what they’re doing?

Whenever I see something like this, my first question is, wow what a beautiful cross-platform UI -- I wonder what they are using?

It's amazing how challenging it is in 2020 to have a simple path for creating a cross-platform UI that actually looks good and is not aimed at developers as users, but rather competes with the polish of established applications. Unless you go with Electron or pay thousands per year for a Qt license, options are quite limited.

I have a 4K option in the youtube menu.

At one point in the video, there is a 1.8 million pixel image where they discuss and show zooming into the image while preserving detail.

This is interesting but I’d have to assume that the actual cost Vimeo is charging is not an important factor here. The developer time spent setting this up would quickly exceed the annual fee for Vimeo in just an afternoon. That excludes the ongoing maintenance and inevitable edge cases you would encounter over time. Still fun, but I don’t think Vimeo’s price justifies this effort alone.

It seems you think a differing point of view in a debate must be delivered via condescension, which is unfortunate.

Despite that you’re getting downvoted, I’m rather curious about the connotation of these words myself.

So many browsers offer a blank tab with all this kind of information on it already. When you open the browser or open a new tab, you see that information anyway.

I wonder how much of those things he actually figured out in his 20s and just did not publish, versus thinking about them without drawing many conclusions or making significant progress until he actually published 20 years later?

I’m curious, just how wrong is the comment? A parallel political scenario, the election of Trump, was also characterized by a fundamental political platform centered against other races and cultures, and this was acknowledged and successful.

I understand your point, even if I do disagree somewhat. While the freedom to interact in ways that are not electronic is still an option, it is such a tiny fraction of the choices most people make when communicating, that the presence of this option almost seems irrelevant.