jezek2
Joined 3 years ago
Joined 3 years ago
The trust problem is a general one, it even involves trusting yet another app (not just the installation method). This can be solved by providing a good value and good references / marketing.
For developers it is most likely a FOMO by thinking about anything other than App Store as "a lesser". But just being in the App Store doesn't achieve much as you're one among the millions, you have to market your app yourself anyway.
Some users have this weird association where web apps are considered as not secure while native apps are safe while in reality it's the exact opposite, web apps are nicely sandboxed and native apps siphoons out private information in bulk.
I don't think there is a genuine barrier if you have a really good app that adds enough value to the user. For example GeForce NOW (and other game streaming services) with millions of users use PWAs on iOS/iPad with success.
The installation process can be presented as a simple guide to the users (on Android it's even easier as you can just click a button directly). Of course a portion of users won't be able or be unwilling to follow it. On the other hand you'll get a higher quality users who can follow guides and you retain a direct relationship with them.
There are some annoyances, mostly by Apple when they sometimes add or change some feature that interferes with the web apps, but workarounds are quickly to be found. I would say it's not occurring that often, and native apps needs to adapt to Apple changes too.
It's also a good idea to not use the term PWA, but rather terms like "installable web app" / "add to home screen" or something similar. Almost nobody knows the PWA term (including the developers).
PWAs don't have all capabilities that the native apps have, but most apps don't need these. PWAs certainly can work offline, have push notificatins and other stuff. Some demos are here: https://whatpwacando.today/
Scrolling while selecting text (by moving mouse above or below where page is on screen) doesn't work. In the past I managed to get mouse events outside of the page area by attaching the mouse handler to "window" instead of "document" (at least in Firefox at the time, not sure about Chrome).
Text selection should highlight a character when the mouse is beyond mid point and not after the whole character. Double clicking should highlight a word, triple clicking should highlight a paragraph. When clicking more times it should cycle. It should also support dragging after double/triple click to continue selection of more words/paragraphs.
URLs are not shown when hovering over links. Ideally some invisible overlay that is actually a real link would be preferrable. This way all the ways to open links would work.
The color scheme button is almost invisible.
It also has nothing to do with going public, it is consistent with what they were always doing: it never was fully open, in fact quite the opposite and they were always protective about their HW, you can't even order the SoC as a separate chip, only as a part of premade/customized board.
You would still have slower than native execution speed, security problems with Spectre attacks (in HW process isolation it's avoided by not having other memory mapped at all, other mitigations exist but they cost a lot of performance).
Syscall speedups affect only specific programs or stupidly written SW like some games that are checking current time many many times per frame.
With LLMs it's too easy to replicate implementation of algorithm that is copyrighted, with manual coding it's more deliberate. Sometimes you can't really separate the algorithm from the implementation. So a maintainer needs to check the origin of any algorithm used.
The copyright status for non-algorithm code is quite straightforward and it's often a non-copyrightable code anyway (boilerplate, configuration, obvious steps, etc.). The generated code by LLM has no human author therefore it is public domain, there is no problem of incorporating of public domain code. Any copyrigtable modifications are made by the user of the LLM.
The biggest problem is the amount of low effort contributions caused by AI usage. But one could just reject it on being of low effort.
There is no need to specifically target AI in the policy, with one exception that is unique to LLM contributions: people not understanding anything about the produced code at all. One couldn't trust anything from such contributor.
The traffic is about 100x more expensive on "the cloud" and it killed all the ideas I had for cloud usage. Clouds are not worth it, even for scaling you can always rent more VPSes (or dedicated servers for heavy projects).
I've just finished creating a WASM 1.0 implementation (simple JIT on x86 and x86_64) for plugin usage and I'm looking on how to support more languages beyond C (for which I have "micro-libc" to create really small binaries). In particular C++ and Rust so the article contains useful info for that. C++ that would be more problematic I think, would have to resort to full Emscripten or something... I've tried to compile standalone C++ stdlib but wasn't much sucessful yet.
BTW, I see in the screenshots you also test Firefox, I think it would make sense to test the latest two ESR versions (these are often used by Linux distributions).
Have you followed rules of each subreddit carefully? There also was/is some issue when not all rules were visible in old vs new reddit so you could miss important information if you used the "wrong" reddit.
For a long time I had to ask the moderators to whitelist my posts due to low karma. But hadn't had problems, other than I'm apparently blacklisted from upvoting anything for some reason (it just doesn't apply when logged out or when asked other users).
Nowadays I don't visit Reddit too often because there is simply not much of interesting content, all the subreddits I visit introduced strict anti-AI policies, which is mostly good to me but the result is that there is very little posts overally.