Every time I hear a junior developer say we should rewrite something they have made 0.1 effort understanding, I thank the JS world for not giving a generation or two of developers a well thought out application development framework.

You lost me at shitting on legacy code. My brother in Tux, we don’t rewrite code willy-nilly in the FOSS world either and for a good reason. New code always means new bugs. A shit ton of the underlying code in your Linux OS was written one or more decades ago.

This is because employees in South Korea can “only” work a maximum of 52 hours per week, including twelve hours of overtime. As a result, employees often have to leave work and go home even when important tasks have not yet been completed. For this reason, key employees of the Exynos team are reported to have worked unpaid overtime more and more frequently over the past few years, with the extra hours going unrecorded.

Why is SK’s birth rate in the shitter.

The author explains in the thread and has links to further info.

Alright. Thanks!

Bluesky funding

So just wait and don’t apply this, correct?

It’s a trap.

- A message from Canada

I find the intermediary classification a bit unconvincing and perhaps unintentionally misleading. It sounds like a nice framework to look at the world and it does describe the particular domain alright and it allows for drawing useful conclusions. Unfortunately solving the problems it highlights would produce marginal gains because I think intermediaries as described are just a special case of something more general. Firms of any kind are acting as intermediaries in the exchange of the products of people’s labor. The effects are all the same, these intermediaries make the exchange easier at the expense of keeping some of the labor products from one end or the other, but usually both. It seems to me that the problem of the platform intermediaries power is just a special case of the power of firms over labor. Which really reduces to the problem of the power of capital over labor. If we somehow solve the platform intermediaries problem, we leave the general problem unsolved. And then if we don’t think in terms of the general problem, we can’t even solve the special problem because the tools needed are controlled by capital. That is the lawmakers who could change the law are paid by the powerful intermediaries (firms) and not by the people on either end of the intermediaries. If we hope to ever solve any of this I think we have to look at the world through the general lens and focus on ways to reduce the amount of capital accumulated by firms from people’s labor. Fortunately there are well known solutions for that and they’re actionable for most people.

• camera sensors (larger and more expensive)
• screen (very high brightness)
• processor/SoC (faster, has 7 years of driver support)
• open source support (can build your own AOSP ROM or use Graphene, etc)

I see. Makes sense.

If you need to serve only one user at the time, ollama +Webui works great. If you need multiple users at the same time, check out vLLM.

Why can’t it serve multiple users? Open Web UI seems to support multiple users.

This is the right way to optimize performance. Write everything in a decent higher level language, to achieve good maintainability. Then profile for hotspots, separate them in well defined modules and optimize the shit out of them, even if it takes assembly inlining. The ugly stays its own box and you don’t spend time optimizing stuff that doesn’t need optimization.

Oh this is very interesting!

They’re separate. You can treat them as alternative subs.

When I read, I subscribe to all alternatives on a topic I care about - e.g. Android. Then browsing the Subscribed fees would show me posts from all of them.

When I post, I check their user/month count in order to decide which one to post to. If I’m posting something important, I’d cross post it to the others, just like people do to similar alternative subreddits.

Sounds a bit like the drug dealer’s business model.

I think federated non-profit video platforms won’t work on large scale without P2P.

Google’s fine. They’re using ARM cores that are built on Samsung’s shittier manufacturing process. Next year they’re going TSMC which should improve power consumption dramatically. The lauded Dimensity 4000 also uses ARM cores, just newer and built on TSMC’s process. By the same token, newer Google SoCs should experience similar performance as they update the cores and manufacturing.

The parent asked how do you define at all. What I wrote is just the dumbest way which demonstrates how it can be done. This dumb solution holds up even in your scenario because new media doesn’t gain significant user base every other year. If the list is outdated, containing Facebook and Instagram alone, that would still capture a huge part of the problem already. You can probably figure a slightly less dumb alternative that wouldn’t require amendments just to add another platform. Folks talking about the impossibility of defining something or implementing something in law often ignore obvious solutions, existing working processes, and present this false dichotomy of a perfect solution vs impossible to solve. Sometimes it’s a matter of ignorance, other times it’s driven by (conscious or subconscious) libertarian beliefs.

Here’s one way to do it. The legislators define a list. Products in the list are social media. The list is referenced in the law.