No you're not wrong, if you're comparing ARM CPUs on Linux to one specific Intel CPU, the Lunar Lake V ones. Then yeah you're not wrong, it's very much a case of optimisation for CPUs like the Snapdragon X Elite CPUs in comparison.
But if you widened the scope a bit more, then I think there's plenty of more energy hungry x86_64 CPUs compared to ARM.
Watching all these open source, federated versions of social media platforms is like if you found out your favourite drug was actually manufactured by some really bad people and made people around the world suffer. So you make an open source version of the drug. Similar formula, just this time the people can own it.
Sure you cut out the bad people, but is the situation improved now?
There are projects where long term addicts are given pure medical heroin (Diamorphin) in a controlled environment, and they do considerably better than their control group who does not receive their drugs like that.
Their drug is rage, thirst and cute trap videos generated by AI and selected for maximum engagement.
If it's not harmful it's not the same drug. Unlike diamorphine, a medical grade supply does not reduce harm; it's more like sniffing glue, inhaling poison to escape reality.
The harm from social media is at least in part caused by the feed suggestion algorithm being optimized for screen time (aka addiction). Potentially open social media where the suggestion algorithm is not that could be a big improvement.
No, sorry, but it is unreasonable.. Why should I need an apple device to compile my code for an apple device?
You can build Android apps on an Apple device, no problem. You can build Linux apps on an Apple device, no problem. etc... But the reverse isn't true. Its just more of Apple financially gate keeping their ecosystem so they make more money in as many channels as they possibly can.
Testing on real hardware is the ONLY time I would say that owning, or at least having access to the hardware has real tangible benefits, and I would argue that that you NEED or SHOULD do this.. But to block compiling to that ecosystem? Sorry but I fundamentally disagree.
Blocking compiling, means requiring xcode, which requires a mac, which requires you to give more money to Apple, and is no different IMHO than giving Apple $100 a year, because now you're giving them a lot more of that every X years (where x is how many years that laptop gets updates)
For decades, Microsoft only made Visual C++ for Windows, and alternatives like DJGPP weren't very good. This isn't unreasonable, it's just how programming works when you target a platform. Visual C++ relies on Windows because it's a Windows program, and Xcode is written for MacOS, not for Java or Electron.
What is stopping you from writing an open source alternative to Xcode that runs on Linux?
you can code-sign with open-source tools. That's not the hard part. Signing with a certificate trusted by macOS , that's where there's no avoiding having to go to Apple.
I hate ad companies and ads as much as the next person. But this was one of the moments where I felt like people didn't see what I saw with services era apple. I pointed out that all apple is doing is locking down their phones even further. That they're not eliminating all ads on your phone... Nope they're eliminating their competition.
It's just nuts peoples hatred of ads clouds their vision of this.
I cannot understand the idea of using JavaScript that compiles into "native code".
At what point do JavaScript developers need to realise that this is all convoluted, and begin to use languages better suited for the job.
You want something that can compile into a binary with multiple architectures, multithreading, types, etc? Please use a different language that's built from the ground up to achieve that.
You want something that was designed to add some sugar onto a website? Then yes JavaScript is probably best there.
Not everything needs to be written in this one language that's not designed for it. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Actually TypeScript is an excellent language (in my view) for targeting native code. It reads cleaner than Java, C# and even golang in many cases - at least to me.
For example, JS/TS's file-path based imports are more intuitive; several languages do it via explicit namespaces when well-written code is already organized into directories. Of course, all of these design choices are subjective. In fact, disagreement with a few people in the C# user community is one of the reasons I started this project.
Another example - top level functions, being able to export them trivially etc.
> At what point do JavaScript developers need to realise that this is all convoluted, and begin to use languages better suited for the job.
The comment was especially about TypeScript. Unlike the ancient JavaScript versions best used for web sugar you're possibly thinking of, it's a highly pragmatic and well designed general purpose programming language with an unique and very powerful type system.
reply