Fuck yea!

https://archive.ph/39CAN

IMHO the issue is two folds:

1. The makefile were never supposed to do more than determine which build tools to call (and how) for a given target. Meaning that in very many cases, makefile are abused to do way too much. I’d argue that you should try to keep your make targets only one line long. Anything bigger and you’re likely doing it wrong (and ought to move it in a shell script, that gets called from the makefile).
2. It is really challenging to write portable makefiles. There’s BSD make and GNU make, and then there are different tools on different systems. Different dependencies. Different libs. Etc. Not easy.

Yeah, it is one of the least bad uses for it.

But then again, using literal tera-watts-hours of compute power to save on the easiest actually recyclable material known to man (cardboard), maybe that’s just me, maybe I’m too jaded, but it sounds like a pretty bad overall outcome.

It isn’t a bad deal for Amazon, tho, who is likely to save on costs, that way, since energy is still orders of magnitude cheaper than it should be^[1], and cardboard is getting pricier.

I believe you’re missing the actual causality chain here.

While it is actually proven that vendors will degrade your experience artificially to “motivate” you to buy new devices, in the never ending pursuit of monetary gain, there is no such potential incentive here: you aren’t paying for new drivers.

And while others suggest biases, I do believe you are witnessing an effect that is at least partially real, if not totally, but not for the reasons you believe:

Most programs that leverage GPUs end up being GPU bottlenecked. Meaning that one can almost always improve the program’s performance by using a better GPU.

But then, why does a new driver not improve performance, and rather, simply “bring a degraded performance back to previous levels”?

Well, that has to do with auto-updates, and the way drivers are distributed.

While, in a world where one would have to manually update everything, a new driver would almost certainly mean better performance for a given program, most programs in our world auto-update automatically (and sometimes even, silently). And the developers are usually on top of things wrt drivers, because they follow drivers updates closely, get early versions, etc.

Meaning that when a driver is updated, your apps usually are, too. In a way that leverage the new driver for more processing, rather than faster processing. But unlike your automatically updated apps, your drivers are updated manually.

And the consequence of such updates, when you are too slow to update your drivers, is a degraded experience.

Not because anyone artificially throttled your device’s performance, but because you lag too much behind expected updates.

The essence of that article can be summarised in:

• The Streisand effect is helping the news outlets that meta censored.
• We can all move away from meta, and they will essentially go away.

Honestly, if the makefile is well written, I will take that any day. Good makefiles are 😙👌.

They are extremely rare, tho…

I guess the solution would be a declarative language that compiles to makefiles. So that people don’t have to know the nitty gritty of writing good makefiles, and can just maintain a file of their dependencies and settings…

If you can’t count to 3, that’s a you problem, dude…

So, lemme get this straight. We fucked up the climate with industrialisation and uncontrolled capitalism, through energy consumption. Now, the #1 industrial company (that’s two for two, if you’re counting) in chip making is using one of the most energy (and there we go, 100% 🥳) intensive technology at our disposal to try and eventually have a shot at maybe keeping the climate in somewhat of a check… Am I the only one seeing this? 😶

That’s the energy equivalent of giving every kid and teacher guns to “stop school shootings”. 🙃

In that case, your second and subsequent points should have no text, since the source material has no text for them. And the last point can’t arguably have text at all either way. 😉

More seriously, the source material has both texts and images, and it was your choice to only represent half of that. You could have easily written:

Technically, “without text nor image”. Your list is implying otherwise.

Umbrella corp. That has to be satire. Right? Right??

Oh, no, we totally can. We just need to buy local. What? It is “too expensive!!”? Yeah, well, tell me about being part of the problem…

Nice work. 👍

This repost is so old that it is the very first tab in my browser. For the record, I have [~] tabs open. I have had [~] tabs open from some time in 2023. That’s how old it is.

Spez could learn a thing or two from russia. That is not how one uses kompromat…

Not just enders. Creality beds in general. They collapse and wobble.

AFAIU - but that is a veeeeeery “skimmed” take on the issue, so please check what I wrote before taking it at face value:

There were legitimate concerns about tiktok (hugely popular platform distributed as a “black box”, with very concerning permissions and behaviours, and owned by a foreign actor - tiktok is “unavailable” domestically - that demonstrably uses technology in an extremely dystopian way on their own population), so there was quite a lot of public pressure to “do something about it”, and of course politicians jumped on the opportunity to make a (very) broadly fitting legislation targeting it, coincidentally also having utterly damaging and immensely concerning side-effects for the end users privacy and sovereignty of all applications.

Following that, some of the people got (rightly) concerned about the legislation’s effect on their rights and privacy, but the vast majority just saw that their digital crack cocaine was being attacked, and started whining with arguments of varying relevance. At the end of the day, though, a given platform is irrelevant. What is, is the abilities given to the users, and the possibilities that those create. But now, we have a deeply concerning platform, still being immensely popular and uncontrolled; a totally unfitting legislation with incredibly wild “side effects”; and a growing, misguided popular movement to “save tiktok” that will only make a legitimate attempt at mitigating it much harder. Yay.

Edit: after quite some digging, I found the bill here (PDF) - source.

Edit 2: to answer your question more directly:

Can anyone get me up to speed what claims the bill gave to justify TikTok must be either sold or remove from app stores?

The justification is “America’s foremost adversary has no business controlling a dominant media platform in the United States”.

Which is IMHO fair. It isn’t like the CCP would let American corporations, let alone government controlled ones, run services in China, let alone psychiatrically alienate their citizens, instigate discord and radicalization, potentially manipulate the public opinion, have the capacity to covertly do psyops, and actively, aggressively collect any and all data.

The potential problem I see (and probably what concerns most of the privacy advocates out there) however, is that while the bill is aiming at tiktok in particular (fine), it also targets any “foreign adversary”. Meaning that, AFAIU (but IANAL), all the US would have to do to completely and entirely nuke an app (or an entire federated platform!) in the US would be to declare any foreign entity (country, state, corporation, person, etc) their “adversary”. Effectively giving them a single “button” to directly nuke any app and services they don’t see fit. No matter how legitimate.

Give it to someone who wants it and ask money in return.

“Becomes”. (For those still on twitter - shame on you! - here is an even older “news” about the IDF using robots in Gaza).