kevincox @ kevincox @lemmy.ml

https://kevincox.ca/

---

Read more

Posts

6

Comments

809

Joined

5 yr. ago

Moderating

---

I don't know why everyone is so negative. The gameplan seems pretty clear to me.

1. Make expensive fancy product. This is effectively a "devkit" that companies can use to start experimenting with AR software.
2. Make lower cost product. There are now a few decent apps available and early adopters will be willing to buy it to be one the leading edge.
3. Now there is a bigger market, leading more companies to be willing to develop apps.

Apple is hoping that this is enough to break the chicken-and-egg cycle. Enough to get a few powerful apps such that more regular consumers will be willing to buy which again increases the addressable market which makes it more attractive to companies.

Basically yes. But also they can do that via email or web push notifications. Not that I would allow either.

As I said if you know what you want the cashier is usually faster and easier. However I don't eat at any single fast food place very often. So even if I know sort of what I want I don't remember exactly what toppings, flavours and sizes are available. If I was ordering I would probably just pick whatever common order I would expect can work, but I appreciate that I can see a list of options and do a bit of browsing.

Yeah, I like this style but don't want their apps installed on my phone. A few places have mobile sites which is excellent, I know what access it has and it is shut down completely when I close the tab.

I don't agree. As a single counter example of many YouTube has a huge wealth of information and content.

Maybe that value isn't worth the ads, that is much harder to say for certain. But it is clear that there is some valuable information on some sites that are supported by ads.

I am a touch screen enjoyer. At least in theory. I like having time to browse, look at pictures, easy access to customization options and most importantly no feeling of pressure. I am not spending a cashier's time and potentially blocking someone behind me (at least there is usually less of a line for the self-ordering).

However there are negatives for sure. My biggest annoyance is that these devices are often annoyingly slow and unresponsive. They just display a tiny bit of text and images, they should switch between screens at 60fps, not 2s per click. Also if I know what I want it is often faster to tell the cashier and let them enter the order (on their more expert-optimized and less laggy keypad).

Most credit card issuers don't issue credit cards to random apps by solo developers.

I don't know about YouTube but the chunks are often a fixed length. For example 1 or 2 seconds. So as long as the ad itself is an even number of seconds (which YouTube can require, or just pad the add to the nearest second) so there is no concrete difference between the 1s "content" chunks vs the 1s "ad" chunks.

If you are trying to predict the ad chunks you are probably better off doing things like detecting sudden loudness changes, different colour tones or similar. But this will always be imperfect as these could just be scene changes that happened to be chunk aligned in the content.

I would pay a lot of money to see Nintendo's conniption over having to allow home brew and non-approved software on their game consoles. I would love to release emulators for older Nintendo consoles for the Switch so that they don't get to keep charging people again to play old games on newer consoles.

1. I can usually pull out my phone faster than taking a card out of my wallet.
2. Phone-based cards typically have significantly higher limits than physical cards. (I can tap hundreds of dollars with my phone, only about $100 on my card.)
3. The phone needs to be unlocked which is safer than the card which just needs to be tapped with no other authentication.
4. One less thing to carry around.

Because to implement this you need to negotiate with individual credit card issuers. Basically how this works is that your phone is being issued a virtual card with the keys locked inside the phone's HSM. Then it can be used to make NFC payments just like any physical card. So you need 1. contracts with many card providers, 2. card issuance processes with these providers 3. huge amounts of compliance bureaucracy. At the end of the day it isn't really worth it unless you are a huge company and expect to have tons of users or see it as an essential feature of your phone OS.

To buy the next website that people are making fun of him on.

Exactly this. It isn't even really "stitching" as YouTube videos are served as a series of short chunks anyways. So you simply tell the player that there are a few extra chunks which happen to be ads. There is no video processing required it is basically free to do it this way on the sever side.

So don't watch it? I would rather the platform all all legal content then trying to be the morality police.

I would also prefer to use third party recommendation engines (like people posting on Lemmy) then one run by any particular platform.

We don't need a new platform. We need 20 new platforms, and authors can post on whichever ones are best for them. Have real competition and real incentive to be better.

I feel the same way. Or felt. It is a wonderful platform that will let anyone upload and share videos at absolutely no cost. Video hosting isn't as expensive as we are often lead to believe, but it isn't cheap. Especially if you want to provide a great experience like different resolutions and qualities.

I used to subscribe to YouTube Premium and was quite happy about it. However they slowly made the platform worse and worse. At some point it hurt to give them money, even if the subscription was "worth it". I just didn't like giving money to people destroying a great platform.

Luckily YouTube still supports RSS. This means that I can easily mix in other video platforms with no bother. I now subscribe to Nebula and have 35 subscriptions there. I also have a handful of PeerTube, video podcasts and other self-hosted creators. It isn't the "majority" of my subscriptions (Apparently I have ~200 YouTube channels that I subscribe to, but a huge number of them are dead, second channels or incredibly infrequent.) but it doesn't matter. All of my subscriptions come to the same "inbox" and it doesn't really matter what platform they are on.

It's not "inherently insecure" at least not to that degree. (Once could argue that lack of E2EE is insecure.) If you stand up an unrelated instance you shouldn't be able to access private messages that don't relate to an account on your instance. So only bugs in your instance, or your conversation partner's instance, will be able to leak those messages.

For software to run on a computer it needs to speak the computer's "language". This is typically called "machine language" but differs across different hardware. For example most modern Intel and AMD processors speak x86_64. This language has ways to express different operations such as "add these two numbers" or "put this CPU core into a low power mode". This is the fundamental way that software works, but running in this language.

There are languages that are completely different, such as ARM which is very common on mobile devices and is the language used by Apple's new M chips. These have basically nothing in common with x86_64.

These languages also evolve over time. For example x86_64 is a significant extension to the older x86 language. For the most part this is fine, it is like the CPU now knows more words, if you use those new words the new CPU will understand them, but older CPUs won't.

RISC-V is a new machine language. What makes it interesting is that it is a free and open specification. This means that anyone can create a new RISC-V CPU, unlike x86_64 where you need to buy a license from Intel or ARM where you need to buy a license from the ARM corporation. Most people think that this openness has major benefits, for example now anyone can create a new processor which may be better, rather than having innovation being stifled by licensing costs (if you can even get a license) or needing to create their own machine language and require huge amounts of effort to migrate software to it.

Note: It is important not to confuse "machine language" with "programming language". When people write software they very rarely write code in machine language directly. Usually they use a programming language which is then converted into the machine language of the CPU it will run on.

Actually a sailor makes sales.

If you just need to intercept the keypresses in webpages then you can inject a content script and handle these. However there is no way with the new WebExtensions API to intercept browser chrome events.

Additionally there is no way to delay events. So if you want to suppress both shift presses you will struggle to do that. If you are ok to let the first one go through suppressing the second one is trivial.