The idea of a emoji is to sound more human, that's why Ai chat bots use them at the end of their answers, to sound more human and more friendly
This is how you feel about it, but you're posting in a place full of humans who don't communicate that way. It's fine that you like to, but you won't have much luck appealing to a community by calling their norms less-human and unfriendly.
The first stills camera that digitally signs its photos is here. Leica is part of a tech consortium developing this as a standard and other major photography brands are also members, so hopefully this catches on and becomes standard, and expands to video.
It's a sort of chicken-and-egg problem, also similar to the social media critical mass problem.
Creators won't move until the audience is there. Audience won't go until their favourite creators are there. Both won't move until the platform can handle the traffic, but the platform doesn't have the money to afford the required infrastructure until they have revenue coming in from large audiences...
I know your original post was talking about Voyager vs other apps you've tried but the whole reason we're this deep in the comment chain is because someone was talking about using Voyager for over a month and you said you're talking about the Android app that came out more recently. If you don't want to compare the PWA vs Android app versions of Voyager, what are we even doing here?
Sure, so if you choose a browser with a particular bad rendering engine it may give worse performance or battery life compared to the app-packaged version, which uses the system's built-in webview (Google Chrome engine in most cases) for rendering. If you're using a Chromium-based browser to open the web version it should perform just about identical to the app-packaged version since they're the same code and then also executing in the same rendering engine.
It's the same thing as the web version, really. I would not expect there to be any performance (including battery usage) performance since fundamentals it's the same code running the same way.
Take a look at the global human population chart over the last few millenia. Things can seem sustainable when there are a million people on the planet. When there are 8 billion things are a bit different.
Sure. And the further a fork diverges from upstream the more difficult maintenance becomes. My point is that relying on the open source model to fork projects making hostile changes only works so long as the community is actually able to maintain the fork(s), and so long as those forks actually have a reasonable chance of being adopted. It's equally important, if not even more important, to try to ensure these large projects steer in consumer friendly directions than to react and fork to try to remove anti-consumer features.
Google has enough market and mind share that they can push this and it's a real risk of becoming an anti-consumer standard regardless of any attempts to maintain a fork.
So what do I think we, as a body of users of the Internet, should do? Simple. Stop using Google Chrome and any other Chromium based browsers. Google has the ability to push these changes and make them defacto standards (and later, codified standards) because we collectively give them the power to by using Chromium downstreams.
It's a massive undertaking to maintain a fork of something that large and continue pulling in patches of later developments.
Not to say that Brave doesn't have the resources to do so - I really don't know their scale - but this notion of "just fork" gets thrown around a lot with these kinds of scenarios. It's an idealistic view and the noble goal of open source software, but in practical and pragmatic terms it doesn't always win, because it takes time and effort and resources that may not just be available.
This is how you feel about it, but you're posting in a place full of humans who don't communicate that way. It's fine that you like to, but you won't have much luck appealing to a community by calling their norms less-human and unfriendly.