HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

mdasen

16,650 karma · joined April 3, 2008

"Just as most issues are seldom black or white, so are most good solutions seldom black or white. Beware of the solution that requires one side to be totally the loser and the other side to be totally the winner. The reason there are two sides to begin with usually is because neither side has all the facts. Therefore, when the wise mediator effects a compromise, he is not acting from political motivation. Rather, he is acting from a deep sense of respect for the whole truth."

~Stephen R. Schwambach

submissionscomments
mdasen··on Nvidia to buy assets from Groq for $20B cash
They almost certainly plan to invest in the technology. One of the biggest threats to Nvidia is people developing AI-centric ASICs before they get there. Yes, Google has their TPUs and there are others around, but it's early on.

In some ways, it's not about eliminating a competitor. It's about eliminating all the competitors. Nvidia can use its resources to push AI ASICs farther faster than others, potentially cutting off a whole host of competitors that threaten their business. Nvidia has the hardware and software talent, the money, and the market position to give their AI ASICs an advantage. They know if they don't lean into ASICs that someone else will and their gravy train will end. So they almost certainly won't be abandoning the technology.

But that doesn't mean that it'll be good for us.

mdasen··on TailwindSQL – Like TailwindCSS, but for SQL queries in React Server components
Having clicked on the link, it's one commit with the commit message "wtf"

The README also says "License: MIT - Do whatever you want with it (except deploy to production )"

It's that perfect level of absurdity that captures so much of the terrible complexity that often happens.

mdasen··on Using TypeScript to obtain one of the rarest license plates
I'm imagining someone driving in England and the police having no way to input those letters into their system.

I wonder if the Danish system would prevent ÆØÅ and AEOA from both being registered. Would the Danish system Match "ÆØÅ" if someone input "AEOA"? There are unicode normalization rules, but I wonder if systems would be built to handle that. If you're Danish, you'd just use those letters so it wouldn't be a useful feature. If you're English, you wouldn't often encounter those letters so it wouldn't be a useful feature.

mdasen··on VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits
It’s better than most VPNs, but the amount of Cloudflare challenges I get is really annoying.

It’s a little weird because Apple has device attestation which is run via Cloudflare and Fastly. You’d think that would get you around the challenges, but that doesn’t seem to happen.

mdasen··on Microsoft increases Office 365 and Microsoft 365 license prices
At this point?

I remember when Microsoft Office truly felt like a monopoly. In the 90s, nothing could really read/write Microsoft formats reliably. People weren't using PDFs as much and teachers, jobs, etc. all expected you to be sending them .doc files.

Yes, Microsoft wrote the spec fox .docx, but submitted it as an ECMA standard and that meant that people could create alternatives that could read/write .docx quite well. Sure, Microsoft has a little bit of a leg up, but it's nothing like the monopoly they had on .doc.

Today, we expect programs to be able to read and write Microsoft Office formats. In the 90s, we truly didn't. Yes, there might be some advanced things that don't always work, but it's so different today.

mdasen··on It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
That's the entire issue here: JS is a FOSS language and they don't like that Oracle owns the trademark.
mdasen··on Intel could return to Apple computers in 2027
Yes, and to put this in perspective: TSMC is valued around 8x higher than Intel at the moment. If Intel could become a major competitor to TSMC, I don't think they'd worry about Apple monopolizing leading edge nodes.

If Intel becomes the leading foundry, even if their x86 chips are a little behind Apple, they'll still be ahead of AMD. Apple start shipping 3nm back in 2023. It's looking like AMD will get there in another year. If Intel becomes the leading foundry and they're 12-18 months behind Apple, that'll still put them 18-24 months ahead of AMD.

Plus, it's important to think about the symbiotic relationship between TSMC and Apple. Apple can commit to large orders which gives TSMC the ability to invest. If Intel can get that business away from AMD, it means that TSMC won't have the same ability to push the envelope. Without Apple to pay top dollar for early access, will TSMC have the ROI necessary to keep moving as fast as they have been?

I don't think Intel would be concerned about Apple getting the latest Intel Foundry nodes before x86 does. It'd be a win for investors and ultimately a win for their x86 chips too. TSMC has benefitted from being able to invest in improvements and have Apple pay top dollar for it. If TSMC loses that, it also means that AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, and other Intel competitors lose the ability to ride the Apple-TSMC coattails.

mdasen··on Is your Android TV streaming box part of a botnet?
I don't think they're stocking these boxes. A lot of retailers let anyone list products on their website - just as Amazon allows third party sellers to list products. The one I found on BestBuy's website says "Sold & shipped by Evolution Blazed Inc"
mdasen··on I am stepping down as the CEO of Mastodon
Yea, it just feels calmer, where you can follow neat and quirky people who aren't posting like they're addicted to it.

It also feels like one place that can just keep going. With BlueSky, I know they're going to need to find a business model to cover the $36M worth of VC they've taken, many millions in salaries and hardware costs they've paid out, and provide a healthy return for all that risk.

Mastodon feels like a better version of the early days of the internet. Not everything is perfect, but it's a bunch of people running stuff for themselves and their communities. Now even giant universities with tens of thousands of students outsource their email systems to Microsoft or Google. Most content is going through three companies (ByteDance, Meta, Google) with ByteDance being the "tiny" player at an estimated $300B value (tiny compared to the $1.5B of Meta and $3.4B of Google).

Mastodon/ActivityPub stands against that. It lets everyone have their own little piece of the internet and get and send feed updates to each other. No one dominates the network so much that there's a risk of them cutting off the rest. Mastodon gGmbH is a non-profit.

It feels like it can have longevity in a world where I'm always waiting for the enshittification to be turned on. One of the reasons I love Wikipedia is because it feels like a breath of fresh air on an internet that's always trying to make a quick buck, influence me, etc. Mastodon similarly feels like a breath of fresh air.

mdasen··on Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
When you're using WebView2, it uses Windows' built-in browser runtime (Chromium/Edge). Electron ships a browser runtime, but the article notes they're using WebView2.
mdasen··on Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
I think few people are using the Win32 APIs directly and Microsoft has been shifting their stuff a bunch.

WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation ) had been the recommendation a while back, but then Microsoft started pushing UWP (Universal Windows Platform). Both of those have been succeeded by WinUI 3. UWP has been deprecated. WPF is alive, but more in a maintenance mode while WinUI 3 takes over the future. Oh, and WinForms were popular, but now not.

There's definitely been a lot of shifting and I think that's caused a lot of annoyance in the developer community - especially as Microsoft ships JS/WebView2 based apps instead of dogfooding their own stuff. If you hang out in the dotnet subreddit enough, you'll definitely see Windows devs annoyed at Microsoft's mercurial attitude toward their desktop frameworks and seeming lack of direction/interest - as their big new things are JS/WebView2.

mdasen··on .NET MAUI is coming to Linux and the browser
> Microsoft Team is built on Electron and not MAUI

Microsoft Teams was released in March 2017. .NET MAUI was released in May 2022. In 2021, Microsoft replaced Angular with React and moved away from Electron to WebView2 (using the OS' built-in renderer rather than a bundled Chromium). So even the rewrite was a year before MAUI (and they probably started the rewrite before 2021). Plus, part of the point of using React there was that they could basically replace Angular bit by bit.

Microsoft Teams is just older than MAUI. It's like asking why Hadoop is written in Java and not Go or Rust or why Kafka is written in Scala and not Kotlin. Kafka was open sourced in January 2011 and Kotlin came out in July 2011. Kotlin wasn't an option given that they were developing it years before the language was released.

That's not to say that Microsoft's attitude toward MAUI doesn't leave concerns. There was some news a while back about a bunch of layoffs around MAUI. It's always concerning when there doesn't appear to be any dog-fooding going on - is this just some junk they're throwing at us that they don't want to use? I think some hesitation also comes from the Blazor side where it's looking like Microsoft doesn't really see Blazor as a React competitor so much as a way for internal company apps to be made quickly - in contrast to the Google IO presentations on WASM support for Dart/Flutter where they were emphasizing better-than-JS performance.

That said, Microsoft hasn't really released a lot of new (green field) stuff over the past 2-3 years. What product should they have made in MAUI, but didn't? You can't say Teams because that was a giant product way before MAUI even existed. Most of what Microsoft is doing is work on existing products - things they released before 2023/2024 and were in development before MAUI existed. Flutter had a 5 year head start on MAUI.

But there certainly is a feeling that Microsoft doesn't feel committed to it or at least not enough to put its weight behind it.

mdasen··on Microsoft and Google overstate job creation at Chile data centers
It's interesting because the cities some people decry as not business friendly often get lots of job growth while charging companies a lot to expand there.

Cities like NYC, SF, Boston, Seattle usually offer zero incentives and even charge developers fees for new development.

mdasen··on GM Deprecating In-Car App Store for Models as Recent as 2020
I agree with you that it's the wrong choice, but it's not just about ceding control. It's also about ceding the revenue.

For example, to connect their system to the internet, that'll be $20/mo. I'd guess GM gets a large portion of that revenue. If you're using CarPlay, there's no reason for you to buy their service.

It looks like GM makes around $1,000 in profit per vehicle. If half of their customers give them $20/mo for a decade, that's $1,200 in additional revenue. If AT&T takes half of that, it's still $600 which is a solid boost to their profits.

Now, you might say that fewer people would buy their cars and I'd agree - but companies make short sighted plays all the time that backfire. Someone does the kind of back of the envelope math that I did above and says "omg, I can increase our profits by 60% with this one easy trick" and it's wrong because the world doesn't work like that, but you put together some consultants and consumer surveys that are favorable and you get the green light.

I know: GM is just killing their relationship with consumers. I agree with you. But think about what Unity did to their developers. Unity saw the chance to charge a fee every time a game was installed and all the money that would bring - and didn't think about the predictable developer backlash. Companies do these types of things.

mdasen··on OpenAI signs $38B cloud computing deal with Amazon
But is OpenAI building that compute or are they renting it?

OpenAI and Anthropic are signing large deals with Google and Amazon for compute resources, but ultimately it means that Google and Amazon will own a ton of compute. Is OpenAI paying Amazon's cap ex just so Amazon can invest and end up owning what OpenAI needs over the long term?

For those paying Google, are they giving Google the money Google needs to further invest in their TPUs giving them a huge advantage?

mdasen··on Futurelock: A subtle risk in async Rust
I rewrote this in Go and it also deadlocks. It doesn't seem to be something that's Rust specific.

I'm going to write down the order of events.

1. Background task takes the lock and holds it for 5 seconds.

2. Async Thing 1 tries to take the lock, but must wait for background task to release it. It is next in line to get the lock.

3. We fire off a goroutine that's just sleeping for a second.

4. Select wants to find a channel that is finished. The sleepChan finishes first (since it's sleeping for 1 second) while Async Thing 1 is still waiting 4 more seconds for the lock. So select will execute the sleepChan case.

5. That case fires off Async Thing 2. Async Thing 2 is waiting for the lock, but it is second in line to get the lock after Async Thing 1.

6. Async Thing 1 gets the lock and is ready to write to its channel - but the main is paused trying to read from c2, not c1. Main is "awaiting" on c2 via "<-c2". Async Thing 1 can't give up its lock until it writes to c1. It can't write to c1 until c1 is "awaited" via "<-c1". But the program has already gone into the other case and until the sleepChan case finishes, it won't try to await c1. But it will never finish its case because its case depends on c1 finishing first.

You can use buffered channels in Go so that Async Thing 1 can write to c1 without main reading from it, but as the article notes you could use join_all in Rust.

But the issue is that you're saying with "select" in either Go or Rust "get me the first one that finishes" and then in the branch that finishes first, you are awaiting a lock that will get resolved when you read the other branch. It just doesn't feel like something that is Rust specific.

    func main() {
        lock := sync.Mutex{}
        c1 := make(chan string)
        c2 := make(chan string)
        sleepChan := make(chan bool)    
        
        go start_background_task(&lock)
        time.Sleep(1 * time.Millisecond) //make sure it schedules start_background_task first

        go do_async_thing(c1, "op1", &lock)
 
        go func() {
                time.Sleep(1 * time.Second)
                sleepChan <- true
        }()

        for range 2 {
                select {
                case msg1 := <-c1:
                        fmt.Println("In the c1 case")
                        fmt.Printf("received %s\n", msg1)
                case _ = <-sleepChan:
                        fmt.Println("In the sleepChan case")
                        go do_async_thing(c2, "op2", &lock)
                        fmt.Printf("received %s\n", <-c2) // "awaiting" on c2 here, but c1's lock won't be given up until we read it
                }
        }
        fmt.Println("all done")
    }

    func start_background_task(lock *sync.Mutex) {
        fmt.Println("starting background task")
        lock.Lock()
        fmt.Println("acquired background task lock")
        defer lock.Unlock()
        time.Sleep(5 * time.Second)
        fmt.Println("dropping background task lock")
    }

    func do_async_thing(c chan string, label string, lock *sync.Mutex) {
        fmt.Printf("%s: started\n", label)
        lock.Lock()
        fmt.Printf("%s: acuired lock\n", label)
        defer lock.Unlock()
        fmt.Printf("%s: done\n", label)
        c <- label
    }
mdasen··on Futurelock: A subtle risk in async Rust
I'd recommend watching this video: https://www.infoq.com/presentations/rust-2019/; and reading this: https://tokio.rs/blog/2020-04-preemption

I'm not the right person to write a tl;dr, but here goes.

For actors, you're basically talking about green threads. Rust had a hard constraint that calls to C not have overhead and so green threads were out. C is going to expect an actual stack so you have to basically spin up a real stack from your green-thread stack, call the C function, then translate it back. I think Erlang also does some magic where it will move things to a separate thread pool so that the C FFI can block without blocking the rest of your Erlang actors.

Generally, async/await has lower overhead because it gets compiled down to a state machine and event loop. Languages like Go and Erlang are great, but Rust is a systems programming language looking for zero cost abstractions rather than just "it's fast."

To some extent, you can trade overhead for ease. Garbage collectors are easy, but they come with overhead compared to Rust's borrow checker method or malloc/free.

To an extent it's about tradeoffs and what you're trying to make. Erlang and Go were trying to build something different where different tradeoffs made sense.

EDIT: I'd also note that before Go introduced preemption, it too would have "pitfalls". If a goroutine didn't trigger a stack reallocation (like function calls that would make it grow the stack) or do something that would yield (like blocking IO), it could starve other goroutines. Now Go does preemption checks so that the scheduler can interrupt hot loops. I think Erlang works somewhat similarly to Rust in scheduling in that its actors have a certain budget, every function call decrements their budget, and when they run of of budget they have to yield back to the scheduler.

mdasen··on My Impressions of the MacBook Pro M4
Apple was actually late to the glossy display party. HP and Dell moved to them a few years before Apple. I don't think Apple was "insisting" on them, but rather following an industry trend that they were late to.
mdasen··on Israel demanded Google and Amazon use secret 'wink' to sidestep legal orders
I think it'd be unlikely for the Israeli government to try and push this issue. Yes, Google has assets within Israel that could be seized, but it'd be a bit of a disaster. Israel would be creating a scenario where it told companies: go to prison in your home country or we'll seize everything you've invested here.

Also, I can't believe that Google or Amazon would sign a contract that doesn't specify the judicial jurisdiction. If the contract says "this contract will be governed by the courts of Santa Clara County California" and the Israelis agreed to that, then they won't have a claim in Israeli courts. If an Israeli court concluded that they have jurisdiction when both parties agreed they don't have jurisdiction, it'd create a very problematic precedent for doing business with Israeli companies.

Even if an Israeli court would ignore all that, what would Israel get? Maybe it could seize a billion in assets within Israel, but would that be worth it? For Google or Amazon, they face steeper penalties in the US and Europe for various things. For Israel, maybe they'd be able to seize an amount of assets equivalent to 10% of their annual military budget. So while it's not a small sum, it is a small sum relative to the parties' sizes. Neither would really win or lose from the amount of money in play.

But Israel would lose big time if it went that route. It would guarantee that no one would sign another cloud deal with them once the existing contracts expired. Investment in Israel would fall off a cliff as companies worried that Israeli courts would simply ignore anything they didn't like.

The point of these agreements is that Israel needs access to cloud resources. The primary objective is probably to avoid getting cut off like Microsoft did to them. That part of the contract is likely enforceable (IANAL): Israel does something against the ToS, but they can't be cut off. I'd guess that's the thing that Israel really wanted out of these deals.

The "wink" was probably a hopeful long shot that they never expected to work. But they got what they needed: Amazon and Google can't cut them off regardless of shareholder pressure or what they're doing with the cloud no matter what anyone thinks of it. Suing Amazon or Google over a part of the contract that they knew was never going to happen would jeopardize their actual objective: stable, continued access to cloud resources.

mdasen··on Israel demanded Google and Amazon use secret 'wink' to sidestep legal orders
If they're able to gather the intelligence without a public signal, they wouldn't be wanting a public signal. Any discussion of "should we tell Israel" would be limited to people who knew of the secret subpoena's existence. If Israel already had an asset within that group, they'd just have that person signal them in a much more clandestine manner than a public payment mandated in a signed contract.

Either Israel already knows about the subpoena, in which case the discussion doesn't matter, or they don't, in which case their asset wouldn't be in on the discussion.

mdasen··on OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO
The difference is that Mozilla’s for-profit arm is owned by the non-profit. The for-profit part of OpenAI is there to make a lot of individuals and for-profit corporations rich.

OpenAI’s profit-generating subsidiary isn’t just there to further the non-profit mission like a museum gift shop or Mozilla’s for-profit subsidiary.

mdasen··on Boring is what we wanted
I think it's the difference between having enough CPUs that you can launch a product and having enough CPUs that people start planning future products.

Volume takes time. That's why we're seeing 2026. And before someone says "that just gives Apple an advantage because they're smaller," Apple is shipping a comparable volume of CPUs - and they're doing basically all their volume on the latest fabrication tech.

mdasen··on Boring is what we wanted
Yea, this is how I feel too. I've been hoping that Intel would turn itself around, but Intel has failed at its roadmap over the past few years. Intel canceled 20A and 18A is delayed. It had looked like Intel would leapfrog TSMC, but that didn't come to fruition.

I hope that Intel does well in the future. It's better for us all if more than one company can push the boundaries on fabrication.

I also remember the days when the shoe was on the other foot. Motorola or IBM was going to put out a processor that would decimate Intel - it was always a year away. Meanwhile, Intel kept pushing the P6 architecture (Pentium Pro to Pentium 3) and then NetBurst (Pentium 4) and then Core. Apple keeps improving its M-series processors and single-core speed is up 80% since the M1 and 25% faster than the fastest desktop processor from AMD and 31% faster than the fastest desktop processor from Intel.

I'd love for Panther Lake to be amazing. It will put pressure on Apple to offer better performance for my dollar. Some of performance is how much CPU a company is willing to give me at a price point and what margins they'll accept. If an amazing Panther Lake pushes Apple to offer more cores at a cheaper price, that's a win for Apple users. If an amazing Panther Lake pushes Apple to offer 2nm processors quicker (at higher cost to them), that's a win for Apple users.

But I'm also skeptical of Intel. They kept promising 10nm for years and failed. They've done a bit better lately, but they've also stumbled a lot and they're way behind their roadmap. What kind of volume will we see for Panther Lake? What prices? It's hard to compare a hopeful product to something that actually exists today. Part of it isn't just whether Intel can make 18A chips, but how fast can they produce them. If most of Intel's laptop, desktop, and server processors in 2026 aren't 18A, then it isn't the same win. And before someone says "Apple is just a niche manufacturer," they aren't anymore. Apple is making CPUs for every iPhone in addition to Macs so it has to be able to get CPUs manufactured at a very high scale - around the same scale as the Intel's CPU market.

I hope Intel can do wonderfully, but given how much Intel has overpromised and underdelivered, I'm definitely not taking their word for it.

mdasen··on Life next to 199 data centres
Since 2017, Louden County housing prices have gone up 59% according to Zillow. To put that in perspective, NYC is up 24%, LA up 56%, Chicago up 28%, SF up 7%, DC up 10%, Boston up 29%, Atlanta up 48%.

Ashburn, which is where the majority of the data centers are in Louden County, is up 56% so even when you look at a smaller area around the data centers, it doesn't seem to have harmed property values.

Even if you look at mansions on an acre of land a couple houses down from a data center, it looks like they've gone up in value at least as fast the average for both Louden County or Ashburn (https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/44335-Oldetowne-Pl-Ashbur... this place I randomly looked up is up around 70% according to Zillow).

It doesn't look like it's impacted housing prices negatively. That doesn't mean it doesn't impact how some people care about their homes. Some people might prefer to pay higher taxes than look at a data center across the street. But it isn't economically hurting residents. Their property taxes are very low, they have the highest median income in the US, and their property values are going up faster than most.

mdasen··on Life next to 199 data centres
I don't think that the data centers are having a negative economic impact on Louden County residents. It's the richest country in the US with a median household income of $156,821. They also get really low property tax rates because the data centers are paying a lot of taxes compared to their costs. If there were lots more people working there, the county would need to spend a lot more money on roads and such. Instead, they're getting close to free money.

I'm not saying that anyone should want data centers to take over their city/county, but there isn't a strong economic argument against them in Louden County. The people there are the richest in the US and they're getting great economic benefits from it. The question isn't economic. The question is whether that's the community they want to live in: rich and making lots of money off data centers or an area where they don't have as much money and don't have to look at the data centers.

mdasen··on Show HN: OnlyJPG – Client-Side PNG/HEIC/AVIF/PDF/etc to JPG
This is really cool, but I found one thing in testing it out: it seems to do really poorly with WebP images.

I've run some WebP images from reddit through your site and they all end up looking terrible. If I run them through Squoosh.app (MozJPEG, 75%), I get the expected minimal degradation in quality and a 30%ish reduction in size. If I run the same image through your site (which seems hard-coded to Q90 for quality), I get a minimal reduction in size (if any; to be expected given Q90) and it looks incredibly pixelated.

If I give it a jpeg, it works great: a large reduction in size and I can't even notice a difference (which is kinda what I expect for Q90).

EDIT: If I toggle on the "legacy mode" YCbCr (instead of XYB), the WebP files work great. If I get the jpeg from reddit instead of the webp, XYB is fine.

Try an image like https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1o8wo... (you can right click and download the image to get the webp or "download linked file" to get the jpeg). If I put the jpeg into your site with XYB, there's very slight degradation and a 67% savings. If I put the webp in, it looks like it was resized to half or a quarter of the size and then enlarged back up (and it gained 57%). With webp and YCbCr, it gained 63% over the webp, but the image quality is good.

So there's something with the WebP images and XYB that seems like it isn't working.

EDIT 2: I just grabbed an AVIF I have around to test and the XYB seems to have the same problem there as well.

mdasen··on AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025
I'm not surprised they don't offer an even higher tier. When you're pricing things, you often need to use proxies - like 1080p and 4K. It'd be hard to offer 3 pricing tiers: 1080p, 4K, 4K but actually good 4K that we don't compress to hell. That third tier makes it seem like you're being a bit fraudulent with the second tier. You're essentially admitting that you've created a fake-4K tier to take people's money without delivering them the product they think they're buying. At some point, a class-action lawsuit would use that as a sort of admission that you knew you weren't giving customers what they were paying for and that it was being done intentionally, both of which matter a lot.

Right now, Netflix can say stuff like "we think the 4K video we're serving is just as good." If they offer a real-4K tier, it's hard to make that argument.

mdasen··on TiVo exiting legacy DVR business
In some ways, it's more like Disney getting out of silent movies or Microsoft stopping shipping software on floppy disks - or cell phone makers giving up on dumb phones or Apple discontinuing iPods.

The market for DVRs has shifted a lot and while TiVo's system was wonderful, it's hard to get people to pay you a monthly fee for a service that's included for free with your cable package. Companies are often offering networked DVR service with unlimited storage - they record it in their data center and you just stream it later.

TiVo really needed to pivot and simply didn't. TiVo should have become another Roku, but they were probably worried about cannibalizing their DVR revenue. They had the operating system and hardware to beat Roku to the market - or even become the primary alternative to Roku for years after Roku had launched. Roku launched in 2008 and TiVo could have followed. FireTV and AndroidTV launched in 2014 so there was a huge window in there for TiVo (and Chromecast was 2013 so that doesn't change things much).

TiVo was focused on getting individuals to pay them $X per month for service. Roku figured out that it would be a lot easier to get all the streaming companies to give them a cut rather than getting it from the end users as well as being a platform to serve ads to end users.

If TiVo had looked at Roku and said "we can do that even better," they would have had a very different future. TiVo launched a Roku competitor in 2020 based on AndroidTV, but that was way too little and way too late. Back in the late 2000s and early 2010s, TiVo had an absolutely amazing OS. They needed to release a Roku competitor stripped of the DVR bit for the cord-cutting streamers. They needed to pivot their business model toward the service-revenue-cut and ad-revenue model that Roku went after. They needed to see that cable and satellite was a dead-end as those companies would try to cut them out of the loop with their internal DVR products (and even if TiVo were better, most customers wouldn't want to pay extra for it).

TiVo should have pivoted 15 years ago and become one of a couple dominant streaming box players. Instead, Amazon and Google followed Roku into the market even though TiVo had 6 years to enter that market and had a polished OS and great reputation at the time. TiVo feels a bit like Nokia. Nokia ignored smartphones long enough that they kinda faded away - and then their effort was too little, too late.

mdasen··on What .NET 10 GC changes mean for developers
How would this move .NET further away from WASMGC? This is a new GC for .NET, but doesn't add new things to the language that would make it harder to use WASMGC (nor easier).

For example, .NET has internal pointers which WASMGC's MVP can't handle. This doesn't change that so it's still a barrier to using WASMGC. At the same time, it isn't adding new language requirements that WASMGC doesn't handle - the changes are to the default GC system in .NET.

I agree it's disappointing that the .NET team wasn't able to get WASMGC's MVP to support what .NET needs. However, this change doesn't move .NET further away from WASMGC.

mdasen··on Kairos: Immutable Distro for K8s at the Edge
It's very different from k3s. With k3s, you have a Linux installation like Debian or Fedora and you install k3s on it. You can SSH into the box, install any other Linux program not running in Kubernetes, etc. It also means that you need to run security updates and all the other stuff that goes along with administering a Linux box.

With Talos, it's just Kubernetes running on the box. There's no SSH or anything. Yes, it's a Linux kernel running, but you don't have a way of running stuff on the box outside of Kubernetes.

For me, Talos is great. If I'm setting up some boxes for K8s, I don't want to have to deal with admin'ing a Linux box. I don't want to login to the box and run some non-K8s service on it. I just want a K8s node and that's what Talos gives me. I think that's also the experience most people want. It's why people pay AWS, GCS, and Azure tons of money to get hosted K8s nodes rather than a Linux box they need to admin.

← PreviousPage 3 of 34Next →