[-] nous@programming.dev 42 points 1 year ago

That is just double speak for it will adversely affect our bottom line so we don't want to do it.

[-] nous@programming.dev 39 points 1 year ago

Of course it is opt in. Why would it not be? Microsoft have opted in automatically on your behalf. Soon you will only be able to opt in, for your convenience, as too many people were accidentally opting out. /s

[-] nous@programming.dev 40 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Give pipewire a go. It is basically replacing pulseaudio and jack as a combined thing and is meant to not have the latency issues that pulseaudio does.

[-] nous@programming.dev 42 points 2 years ago

That is not true though. The vast majority of people are people that don't do much on their systems at all. Maybe look at Facebook or a few sites, write the occasional document or email and maybe play a few simple games. The type of people that have never heard of Linux or even know what an OS is let alone able to switch to another one. Those types of people will be perfectly happy on Linux if it came pre installed.

The people switching ATM and having issues are the highly technical people that have far more complex requirements and for those it does depend on the person and what they need to do.

The low percentage of users is not a sign of of it not being ready, just the sheer marketing and effort Microsoft has put into making windows the default option.

[-] nous@programming.dev 42 points 2 years ago

Older software is the most noticeable thing. Enterprise does not mean it is better - just that it is supported for a long time and they do that by not changing much on them. They are more designed for servers rather than workstations and generally not a great experiences unless you are running hundreds or thousands of them in an enterprise situation.

Professional just means payed for. What you are paying for is support in managing the systems, not a great user experience.

For home desktops it is far nicer to be on newer software rather than things that came out 5 to 10 years ago.

[-] nous@programming.dev 39 points 2 years ago

The social aspect of going into a dark room to watch a screen in silence? Vs talking a joking around on voice chat?

[-] nous@programming.dev 39 points 2 years ago

The big problem with this take is that they seem to assume it is an all or nothing feature.

Personally I love how rust does it, types are inferred inside a body of a function where they matter less and are generally unambiguous (you need to specify them if they are ambiguous) as you often don't care as much about the exact type you have. But on function parameters are return types they are never inferred as these form the contract to the rest of your program and a unexpected change to one of these can result in your code breaking somewhere else entirely.

Personally I never really use the automatic type annotations in IDEs, they just add noise I rarely care about.

[-] nous@programming.dev 40 points 2 years ago

“We had relied and started to rely too much this year on self-checkout in our stores,” Vasos told investors. “We should be using self-checkout as a secondary checkout vehicle, not a primary.”

That is the key point here. Use them to replace the express lanes but dont replace all checkout points with them.

they actually increase labor costs thanks to employees who get taken away from their other duties to help customers deal with the confusing and error prone kiosks

Now that is bullshit... how can it cost more to have someone spend part of their time to help a customer when they have a problem vs having an extra person help them full time during checkout.

Still, 60% of consumers said they prefer self-checkout as of 2021, presumably because they’ve never seen Terminator (wake up sheeple).

WTH... I really don't understand why this person hates them so much. Seems to have some hidden agenda but I cannot for the life of me tell what it is.

[-] nous@programming.dev 41 points 2 years ago

8,000 characters in five hours is 1,600 characters per hour, or 27 characters per minute.

This is irrelevant. Typing when coding is not evenly spaced out over those 5 hours. It is sporadic with most of the time thinking or reading documentation or reading source code and trying to figure out what you want to type. No good conclusions can be drawn from this logic and makes that whole part of the argument irrelevant.

If I were typing that slowly I would quickly forget what the hell I was even trying to do in the first place. Which is the bigger part - when you do need to type you want to quickly get the ideas you have down as fast as you can think them. Going too slow can cause your mind to wander and that can really hamper your productivity.

There is also the cost of context switching. And it is a context switch to go from writing ideas down to making sure I have all the boiler plate and syntax correct. The less of the need for doing that the better IMO.

And TBH I don't really understand the rest of their arguments. They introduce two bits of code, one very short simple class then one with lots of helper methods to set various things while creating a new object. And then concludes with a short paragraph on some real benefits without really explaining why. With the whole paragraph being more of an argument about immutable code being better rather than longer vs shorter code. Then follows up with an entire section on why his code increases maintenance as refactoring requires more points to update with his immutable code and thus prefers languages like F# where the immutable version is a one liner... Which defeats the whole argument that typing is not the bottleneck? I really don't follow his logic here.

Apparently, it has to be explicitly stated: Programmer productivity has nothing to do with typing speed.

I feel they have completely failed to convince me of this fact. Despite me already thinking it is not one of the more important factors of productivity and there are better things to optimise around.

My opinion is that code length is not that important a factor, but you should not go hog while and write the longest things you can either. Every extra bit of code should add some value somewhere. Like taking his examples, spending a bit of time writing the immutable version here lets you reduce the amount you need to write when using that code. Which is a trade-off that can be worthwhile - increasing typing now for reducing typing later. But also the reduced typing makes the where the code is used easier to read and clearer as to what is happening, get a copy of the object with one field updated. That is a nice concept to have and read. Without the need to refer to all the fields every time you want a copy.

[-] nous@programming.dev 41 points 3 years ago

What things are being messed up? You should be able to just install as many DEs as you want without them interfering with each other - just select which you want on the login screen,

[-] nous@programming.dev 41 points 3 years ago

https://proton.me/ Are worth a look at. The allow custom domains and I believe have IMAP support. Additionally they encrypt everything they store so are very good from a privacy side (at least as far as you can be private using email).

[-] nous@programming.dev 42 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

Faster than JavaScript

For pure computation, using the right language it can be faster. For a general website that needs to manipulate the DOM the performance is about the same as what popular JS frameworks can do (and can be faster than popular ones like react). But there are faster JS frameworks that react already available and people are not flocking away from react to these other frameworks. So speed is not a big enough issue here for people to want to move to a new language with WASM.

Has a smaller file size

Not sure this is true. Maybe for a single function. But for a general application? I don't think so. WASM tends to be a bit larger than JS code I think as you often need to ship more code, where JS can rely more on things built into the browser. But we are at a point where this difference is not a huge concern any more either. So is not really a point for or against WASM here.

Can be compiled to from pretty much any programming language

This is a huge misleading point. Even if you could do it from any language not all languages have a ecosystem that is useable for it and a lot of languages require large runtimes that need to be shipped with the WASM bundle (making the points above far worst).

Can be used outside of the browser easier thanks to WASI

So can JS? And native code? So I don't really see what this statement is meant to be arguing for? It is irrelevant when talking about websites using WASM in the browser.

So why aren’t most websites starting to try replacing (most) JS with WASM now that it’s supported by every major browser?

Why should they start using it? They all have existing code, their devs already know JS. What major advantage would WASM give them over what they currently have? The points above I have already gone through and are not a big enough reason for this change outside of niche use cases. JS is good enough for most use cases and people that are already working in the web browser side of things already know it. There is little reason to make the switch to WASM as even in languages like rust, which likely has the most mature eco system, still has a vastly less mature eco system for web dev than JS.

There is no line that needs to be passed that will cause floods of people to start adopting it and start converting everything they maintain over towards it. If there is a good enough reason to adopt this technology then it will be done very gradually over many years if not decades. People wont suddenly throw out everything once some line is crossed without some extreme and unconditional benefit to doing so.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

nous

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 3 years ago