waboremo

Yeah I really hope this is exclusive to personal throwaway projects. Otherwise such thinking can land you and your potential users/clients in very hot water. A belief like avoiding SQL because is too complicated indicates to me you're incapable of handling data appropriately. Again, totally OK if you're smart enough to understand that you're not going to be using user data anyways maybe saving a theme variable here and there. But none of that is indicated in the article, and is why I'm so confused why the comments ITT are supportive.

These are regionally restricted on top of users being able to opt out of such service at both the visa/mastercard level and at their local banks. This means you cannot rely on the service entirely and have to create alternative flows even if the update system works perfectly. Both Visa and Mastercard detail for developers the manual methods they can use, which still require human monitoring/input. They also both warn people about monitoring this at the merchant level so you minimize disruptions, late fees, cancellations, etc.

It's not as seamless as you're making it sound.

Outside of buying accounts, some people literally just want control. For the same reason that people will spend countless hours moderating large subs for free. They want to push certain narratives on subs, so you'll see large accounts where all they post are generic filler distractions or inciteful links. It's not all super nefarious or political, often it's things like mindless fanboy wars, where they only post things that make their favorite companies look good.

For others, they do it because getting upvotes and reddit awards makes them feel good. They see themselves as community pillars. I suppose this kind of feeds into the above reason in some ways.

If you check /r/games today, you'll see one user is responsible for over half of the submissions. Such accounts are what I mean, where unless they have fine tuned a bot to such a degree, they're really just someone with a little bit too much time on their hands.

All of the Google sections seem to be terrible for their use case. Images are lacking filters and are filled with Pinterest results which send people into a cycle when trying to get to the actual image to save. News will sometimes show old news when it's obvious there should be new information about whatever you're searching, leading you to have to specifically indicate sort by date. Videos will prioritize certain domains even if the video itself is irrelevant to your search (ie searching up an actress, it'll show an IMDB video first, even if the video is very old and is just a generic trailer for some movie they were in ages ago). If you search something relatively generic, the new search bubbles will now hide the other categories (ie searching adele will hide categories like shopping or books). The finance option literally just redirects you to Google Finance now, doesn't even retain your search.

They've really let the core search experience be deteriorated so extensively, that we can't blame all of it on SEO.

We're going to see a lot more clones in the coming weeks/months, which arguably also prevents most of them from doing their intended job as a replacement. Eventually, one will form when the dust settles.

It's a slow process, but an inevitable one. Twitter has demonstrated this, where it isn't this instant switch, but a slow burn. We're only now getting Meta's take on such a replacement for example. Same will happen with Reddit now people are aware how fragile it really is. I just don't see direct replacements happening this year.

Anecdotally I do see far more aggressive displacement on Reddit than I did with Twitter however, perhaps due to how impersonal Reddit is where most feel they can abandon it much easier than a Twitter account with many professional colleagues attached.

The coordination required for such would be quite intense. Also fragile, as the third party apps would quickly abandon any roadmap agreed upon if Reddit changed its mind.

Maybe it can happen now among the apps that have put their foot down about a complete end, but certainly loses a lot of momentum from those who might have already uninstalled them.

They have, you can now select "none" when creating an Apple ID for the billing information. I believe the only way previously to get around this issue for a while was to buy a new Apple device because the initial device setup allowed for an Apple ID creation without billing info demands.

What happened as a result of finishing those projects?

I would say they are definitely in the same range that any difference is negligible.

Working in either shatters the soul in record breaking speed. The terrible things you have to witness. Humanity at its rawest and at times lowest. Both groups, no matter how many times you have to deal with the certain situations they do, you never get used to it (which is kind of important, as soon as you do get used to it, you've lost what makes you such a good nurse/vet - empathy).

Yes they did. Because they do not care about a good browser engine product. They care about selling services on top of that. So whether it's Chromium or something else entirely, they don't care. They went with what had the most external developers working on it because again, they do not care about the engine.

>So they should start small and slowly build up the artificial complexity that accumulated over decades in incubent browsers until it reaches feature parity?

No, they should find a new angle. What are they building a browser engine for? To go back to the burger example, you cannot compete with McDonalds by trying to do everything they do. Everyone understands this about general products, you can't compete with Apple by making an iPhone clone. You can't compete with Marvel by making funny light hearted hero movies. Yet, when it comes to browser engines people short circuit.

Do you know about Steam? The video game launcher/store. This store is so successful that it's spawned many competitors who struggle to compete. Why is this? Because they do not want to change the status quo too much, they just want their company to be where Steam is. So they spend so much time and money trying to add features Steam has had for years now, all while people refuse to budge because "why use a steam clone that's worse?" Sound familiar?

This is the current problem with browser engines. Everyone just wants to be Chrome, to have Chrome's userbase, but they don't want to actually think about a product. They don't want to find a niche, or make people rethink what a browser should be/do.

Therefore, it's not a problem that people keep failing to be Chrome. I say good riddance. We don't need a Chrome alternative; we need something else entirely.

Exactly, it's always the loaded questions they start with to control the narrative.

Your theory hinges on the idea that by remaining on the platform, they will not dive into these darker thoughts. Which is quite absurd, don't you think? This idea that one banning is going to be the catalyst, rather than they already feel a certain way and are regularly encouraged by the platform to feel that sort of way.

It's never been easier to build web pages. Never been easier to build a browser.

Where problems arise is when people expect to challenge behemoths right from launch. Like demanding your burgers be adopted by all mcdonalds consumers when you haven't done anything to actually compete with them.

Yes, it's not just a headset/screen. In their words, a spatial computer. This coming with a new OS also signifies how they really want people to view it as a standalone product rather than a Valve Index which requires a PC to use.

As usual, the devil is in the details.

We can see this with voice to text, in which despite in theory being so much faster than typing things out, tends to not be due to these details (processing lag, clunkiness of handling different forms such as whether a word is part of a command or should be added to the text).

Same will happen here. People will get over the hype period and then realize hey this isn't actually faster or more efficient than a traditional tool. Apple knows this as well, it's why they're marketing it as a media consumption device first and foremost, where a lot of these problems can be safely ignored.

This in combination with the above is a huge issue, in which people are too concerned about "don't use Cloudflare" angle that they don't spend any effort into creating alternative solutions for the problems that exist.

We can dismiss the problems all we want by saying "most people don't need it", but if they're using it, clearly they see a need and this has to be addressed not ignored. Which is why it's so hard to fight against the urge, so go ahead and use it if it saves you time and money. Until real alternatives exist, don't hinder yourself.

No real surprises here; once you remove the source, the moths stop flying towards it.

I reckon for most; their hate is based on emotional manipulation over an internal drive. This is what separates their "leaders" who are doing it for a specific end result, and their "followers" who are reacting to whatever comes across their feeds. Which is how they leverage this, it's easy to emotionally manipulate those who have no idea what's going on, they don't even recognize the ads/recommendations they're getting have served a specific purpose.

Pedantry doesn't get you anywhere, you should know this by now you're a grown man.

Now buy a functioning search model so joining Tumblr isn't a gigantic hurdle of useless tags and filters.

Not being able to ask clever questions is the problem though, because once you've heard one of his guests speak elsewhere, you're getting a basic repeat through Lex.

His podcast is alright for people who aren't in any of the domains and therefore just want overviews. Anything else, and it's about as useful as listening to an actor repeat the summary for the movie they're promoting for the millionth time.

Adguard blocking inside apps is exclusive to DNS methods, these methods are extremely easy to circumvent by app providers. Reddit (as an example since topic of thread) already gets around these DNS blocking methods because content and ads are served from the same location.

Right, and you could have afforded better/more coffee with the savings costs to consuming less power. Which is the point: energy costs are not 0. These costs vary depending on which devices you play on, regardless of games. Someone playing the same games as you on PS5 rather than a gaming PC, is going to save enough money to then buy another indie game per month or more coffees in that month than you.

Note: this isn't about debating which platform is best, rather understanding power consumption impact and the cost to your budget.

Are these costs major? Life changing? Absolutely not. But you should care about them and make decisions incorporating them, not ignoring it as if power consumption is irrelevant even if doubled!

And now we get to actual solutions: public funding. But it's something a lot of people don't want to admit. We skirt around the issue, this relies on donations, that relies on the goodwill of the owner, all of it to ignore the fact that what we really want is public funding for crucial software such as forums/social networks (and hosting them).

Agreed, we need to be honest about which problems we are actually trying to tackle.

Decentralization doesn't tackle the "how do we long term maintain a social network" problem. No decentralized protocol does. Which means, ultimately, these servers are slowly being turned off by their owners in 10 years or whatever the case, and we're back at it with "how do we solve the current problem of online forums disappearing?"

You should care because you're paying for that energy use lol

Yes, but all of those have impact to the actual function and performance of the proposed solution. By doing so, you are changing the solution.

Look at FizzBuzz. If you were to set strict requirements on performance (and allow for reiterative testing), the results from different groups of people would be identical. They would reach the same conclusion because that's how code works, it's far more aligned to math than it is creative writing.

So you cannot take an existing code solution and translate it to your own style. You are altering the program, the efficiency, and therefore the solution itself. Even when you do something like changing 1 single variable name!

That would be my general theory as well, you're far more likely to meet someone who is left leaning who admits to having posted on 4chan (or still does) than you are otherwise. Maybe it has to do with perceived biases, in that a right leaning person/group is probably then going to feel they are aligned with the seediest aspects of 4chan, whether they actually do or not and their perceived social impact/failings for using 4chan.

The idea that creating music has had a huge technical barrier is laughable. It has not existed for ~20 years. Artists like Tinashe have learned to produce music themselves with programs like ableton, not a lick of mastering instruments or graduating from this and that art school. Just a general sense of what sounds good to you. Unlike visual art, there's no mechanical barrier either, no mastering of techniques. You can genuinely fiddle around with knobs and buttons and create something that sounds great to you - soundcloud is filled with these.

So there isn't going to be an increased level of profound self expressions because of this. Quite the opposite, more pure noise for the purpose of farming ad revenue.

What's worse, and an aspect many proponents of AI generations ignore, is that by ushering people into this specific channel of caring more about prompts than all else, we are doing a real disservice to potential people who could have become serious masters of their realm. After all, "why learn how that music program works when I can just generate it?"

This is called The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon, a belief that something happens far more often than it actually does.

I'm not so sure about this comparison even. There are multiple factors at play that you're just assuming, that the $500 leather boots are going to be worn for 10 years to be equivalent to the crocs, but I'm not sure that's the norm. Excluding those who have the means easily for $500 leather boots, who likely will just buy more of them to rotate (thus creating waste). Surely someone who spends $500 on leather boots is also going to care about their status, and therefore might get them repaired far more often.

These repairs, while likely less wasteful than full-on recycling, have costs attributed to them. It costs to produce the goods required to repair. These goods often aren't super sustainable products either. With these factors in mind, is the comparison equal? Can we absolutely stand by the idea that paying for $500 leather boots will be better for the environment and you for 10 years?

Which is why when making these comparisons we should really get into the nitty gritty details, otherwise we're just handwaving a bunch of things and making assumptions to justify our position. By doing so, we'll be able to make better choices with proper information rather than shifting the burden of environmental impact elsewhere (to a repair shop or shoe makers, etc).

Note, this is not a defense of crocs vs leather boots. The product categories are just throwaway examples.