Kissaki

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 6 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I don't get what the article is trying to say. It contradicts itself or doesn't make sense.

consists of Instagram, Meta-owned Facebook, and Snapchat

Meta-owned Facebook - contrary to… Meta-owned Instagram? The whole point of the article is that Meta owns both. I'm confused by one being owner-labeled here and the other not, in a listing of services, describing social media landscape.

the now-competing platforms would see more ads – including the same ones on both platforms, which the researchers show could lead to lower click-through rates

Their whole argument is: 1. competition leads to lower ad prices 2. split and lower ad prices leads to more ad impressions/displaying

Lower click-through rates are not a problem for users either.
Will users really see the same ads on both platforms when they did not before?
The article should have better separated advertiser impact from user impact.

What's left is their claim, apparently founded on previous and their own new studies, that users will see more ads. I'm skeptical we can say that now. Especially with why this whole thing is a question in the first place…

This isn’t good news for the FTC, which sued Meta in 2020 on the grounds that it acquired Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp two years later with the intention of using its market power to squash competitors.

Not good news for the FTC? They sue for monopoly and win. What does that have to do with ads and ad impressions? So far off the whole point.

Katz cautions that their study isn’t saying that an Instagram spin-off would necessarily be the wrong solution if Meta is ruled a monopolist. While the effects on digital advertising are significant, “there are other reasons why a Facebook-Instagram separation might be beneficial,” he says. “This includes encouraging other platforms to enter the social media market or investments in other aspects of the user experience, like better privacy protections.”

Last paragraph, or quote, seems to disregard the entire article that came before it.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 5 points 5 hours ago

Why is single line comments listed when it's green for all of them? Do they not have multi-line comments?

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

What are "frontend language"s?

Just wondering if this is very incomplete or due to scoping.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 0 points 5 hours ago

I don't know. So it very well may be zero.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

If you have those problems it's probably time to invest into clearing all those risks and uncertainties up. Even if you just let it sit because it works, there is no telling what it means for company, IT, and data security.

It's not like everything has to be upgraded at once either. Windows is quite compatible. The main thing is the hardware requirement when upgrading to 11.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 5 points 8 hours ago

Mr Zuckerberg has dismissed the allegations in court filings as “extreme claims”.

Claims being extreme alone isn't really a dismissal.

"Those claims are extreme! But correct." pays /s

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 10 points 9 hours ago (2 children)
  • 44% Male/Masculine
  • 39% No information
  • 18% Female/Feminine

Tech bias even on public domain open contribution datasets. Apparently could use more female contributors.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago

A standard for build output might make sense to me. Maybe just throw cache stuff in .cache and build output to .build (with intermediate artifacts in there as well potentially).

When enabled via flag, dotnet puts stuff into artifacts/obj, artifacts/bin, and artifacts/publish respectively. I like that. So much better than every proj folder having their own.

And there's really no need to make it a dot folder. For the publish you don't want to anyway. And you may want to navigate to bin as well, to run a build or inspect the output.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

It depends.

If you can do a static website, don't need user content management, do it. You evade all kinds of trouble and technical complexity.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

warning letter? throw them out right away

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 12 points 2 days ago

A bit too broad to give a specific answer from my side.

Overall, I prefer web based over apps, because I can CSS hack and if necessary JS hack them.

Web also means it doesn't litter my PC or mobile phone or tablet. And that it can't fetch more data than it needs or I want it to have access to.

Bad software is bad software, no matter if it's installed or on the web.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 3 points 3 days ago

The git compatibility is necessary for adoption and connected use.

jj does significantly reduce the work interface, but the git compatibility increases complexity again.

I tried it out a little bit a few days ago, and found it interesting. But given my git knowledge and tooling, I can't reasonably switch. First, I would miss my TortoiseGit Log view (entrypoint to everything). But also, the connection between jj and git seems complex and potentially error prone.

As a fresh and independent tool I can definitely see how it's much easier and better, especially for people not familiar with Git.

 

Examples from the README

example 1

[
  { "let": { "name": "JSON", "times": 3 } },
  {
    "for": {
      "var": "i",
      "from": 1,
      "to": "times",
      "do": [
        { "print": { "add": ["Hello ", "name"] } }
      ]
    }
  }
]

example 2

[
  { "import": "system.jpl" },
  { "print": { "call": { "now": [] } } },
  { "print": { "call": { "osName": [] } } },
  { "print": { "call": { "cpuCount": [] } } },
  { "let": { "a": 9, "b": 4, "name": "JPL" } },
  { "print": { "add": ["\"a + b = \"", { "add": ["a", "b"] }] } },
  { "print": { "mul": ["a", "b"] } },
  { "print": { "div": ["a", "b"] } },
  { "print": { "mod": ["a", "b"] } },
  { "print": { "&": [6, 3] } },
  { "print": { "||": [false, true] } },
  { "print": { "gt": ["a", "b"] } },
  { "def": { "sq": { "params": ["x"], "body": [{ "return": { "mul": ["x", "x"] } }] } } },
  { "print": { "call": { "sq": [5] } } },
  { "def": { "greet": { "params": ["who"], "body": [{ "return": { "add": ["\"Hi, \"", "who"] } }] } } },
  { "print": { "call": { "greet": ["\"JSON Fan\""] } } },
  { "if": { "cond": { "<": ["b", "a"] }, "then": { "print": "\"b < a 👍\"" }, "else": { "print": "\"b >= a 🤔\"" } } },
  { "for": { "var": "i", "from": 1, "to": 3, "step": 1, "do": [ { "print": { "call": { "sq": ["i"] } } } ] } },
  { "print": "\"All features in one! 🎉\"" }
]

example 3

[
// 🚀 Welcome to JPL — JSON Programming Language!

// Import system utilities for fun stuff
{ "import": "system.jpl" },

// Print system info
{ "print": { "call": { "now": [] } } },
{ "print": { "call": { "osName": [] } } },
{ "print": { "call": { "cpuCount": [] } } },

// Define a math function to square a number
{
  "def": {
    "square": {
      "params": ["x"],
      "body": [
        { "return": { "mul": ["x", "x"] } }
      ]
    }
  }
},

// Greet a user
{
  "def": {
    "greet": {
      "params": ["name"],
      "body": [
        { "return": { "add": ["Hello, ", "name"] } }
      ]
    }
  }
},

// Declare variables
{ "let": { "a": 7, "user": "Kapil" } },

// Use greet function and print
{ "print": { "call": { "greet": ["user"] } } },

// Conditional message
{
  "if": {
    "cond": { ">": ["a", 5] },
    "then": { "print": "a is greater than 5" },
    "else": { "print": "a is 5 or less" }
  }
},

// Loop with break and continue
{
  "for": {
    "var": "i",
    "from": 1,
    "to": 10,
    "step": 1,
    "do": [
      { "if": { "cond": { "eq": ["i", 3] }, "then": { "continue": true } } },
      { "if": { "cond": { "gt": ["i", 7] }, "then": { "break": true } } },
      { "print": { "call": { "square": ["i"] } } }
    ]
  }
},

// Fun ending message
{ "print": "🎉 Done with curly braces and JSON fun!" }
]

 

The population (especially the younger generation, who never seen a different kind of technology at all) is being conditioned by the tech industry to accept that software should behave like an unreliable, manipulative human rather than a precise, predictable machine. They're learning that you can't simply tell a computer "I'm not interested" and expect it to respect that choice. Instead, you must engage in a perpetual dance of "not now, please" - only to face the same prompts again and again.

 

Building UI in .NET MAUI with XAML continues to be the most popular approach. […] One of the downsides is how verbose it can become. […]

.NET 6 introduced global and implicit usings for C# which greatly reduced the using statements at the head of many C# files. Now in .NET 10 starting with Preview 5 we are introducing the same for XAML so you can declare your namespaces and prefixes in a single file and use them throughout. In fact, you can now omit the use of prefixes altogether!

 

Starts with the basics of how Datamoshing works in video encoding, then explores it in game engine rendering.

 

Developer experience, concrete examples, contextualized, including flaws/edge of capabilities.

Ideation, Maintenance, Coding, Testing, Debugging, …

Chapters:

  • Speaker Introductions
  • 00:03:03 - Personal experiences with AI in coding
  • 00:14:41 - Updating regular expression engine
  • 00:31:39 - AI Assisting in Code Writing and Fixing Mistakes
  • 00:34:01 - AI-Driven Regex Capabilities for Uri Templates
  • 00:37:59 - Enhancements in Memory Extensions
  • 00:44:10 - Discussion about AI handling tasks and upcoming merge
  • 00:46:00 - AI creates and handles test cases automatically
  • 00:46:57 - AI tackles project tasks, improves efficiency, and handles edge cases

A good look into how it is and can currently be used.

view more: next ›