Live data from Hacker News

Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

github.com

61–70 of 307 posts

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#61
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

300 MB is 1.25% of my RAM. An application using 1.25% of my RAM seems reasonable.

1.25% of Elon Musk's net worth is $5.2 billion dollars, but buying, I don't know, a new PC for that price would not be reasonable. Okay, bad analogy. My point is: just because your budget is high and you've got bytes to burn doesn't mean all those bytes should be burned.

Paying for RAM and having it sit around doing nothing is stupid.

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#62
post #53

> When pressed for reasons what exactly is so bad about Electron, they can rarely offer anything than vaguely mumbled "memory usage" or "b-but it's an entire browser" (both of which have not been true for years, for example Electron's memory usage has improved dramatically, but the meme stuck) I downloaded Nuclear (the AppImage, if that matters) and booted it up. Instant 300MB RAM usage. I think I'll pass.

What's really a meme is: " I got 32 GB of RAM, who cares? " I see a parallel with networked services being developed and tested under "works for me" lab conditions without latency, jitter, or reduced bandwidth. "It works fine on my 10 Gbps network, who cares about 2 extra MB of Javascript?" For one, because the very moment you have that line of thought, you're probably already an outlier.

You would be hard-pressed today to find computers with less than 8 GB of RAM. 300 MB is 3.66% of 8 GB of RAM. Which, again, is absolutely nothing.

Okay, let's assume you have a computer with 4 GB of RAM. Still 7.32%. That is low.

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#63
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's active hostility Not really? If the testimonials are true, then simply making the app itself is an act of hostility. The parent comment is putting it as nicely as it can be put. If you don't want people to pirate your music, your only path of recourse as a musician is to stop uploading digital copies of your work. There is no honor system in music or data and there never will be.

>The parent comment is putting it as nicely as it can be put. If you don't want people to pirate your music, your only path of recourse as a musician is to stop uploading digital copies of your work. There is no honor system in music or data and there never will be. I'm just tired of this technolibertarian mindset of "it's not wrong because no one is stopping me from doing it". There is no "honor system" in life eith…

Then maybe we'll never see eye-to-eye. I grew up with an iTunes account, but I never spent my money on music. Some weeks my family lived paycheck-to-paycheck, some nights skipping dinner. I downloaded my music off YouTube to my 2005 HP Compaq, put it on my iTunes library and synced it to my iPod Shuffle. Didn't weigh on my conscience when I pirated video games or FL Studio either, not then and not now.

If that made me an asshole, then 11-year-old me was a supervillain bumping Aphex Twin. Oftentimes I think HN forgets to consider the 99% when contemplating ethics over sous-vide.

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#64
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.25% of Elon Musk's net worth is $5.2 billion dollars, but buying, I don't know, a new PC for that price would not be reasonable. Okay, bad analogy. My point is: just because your budget is high and you've got bytes to burn doesn't mean all those bytes should be burned.

Paying for RAM and having it sit around doing nothing is stupid.

It's not doing nothing. It's caching frequently accessed files on my filesystem, which generally speeds everything up especially with HDDs. Why should someone instead waste that on a needlessly bloated music player?

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#65
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Comparing copying data to battery/assault is wild

I've copied your sensitive product source code before leaving for lunch then released it to the public for free. Why are you mad? We all die eventually...

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#68
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.25% of Elon Musk's net worth is $5.2 billion dollars, but buying, I don't know, a new PC for that price would not be reasonable. Okay, bad analogy. My point is: just because your budget is high and you've got bytes to burn doesn't mean all those bytes should be burned.

Paying for RAM and having it sit around doing nothing is stupid.

Paying for RAM because a dozen different programs can't be bothered to make user focused software is stupid.

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#69
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's active hostility Not really? If the testimonials are true, then simply making the app itself is an act of hostility. The parent comment is putting it as nicely as it can be put. If you don't want people to pirate your music, your only path of recourse as a musician is to stop uploading digital copies of your work. There is no honor system in music or data and there never will be.

>The parent comment is putting it as nicely as it can be put. If you don't want people to pirate your music, your only path of recourse as a musician is to stop uploading digital copies of your work. There is no honor system in music or data and there never will be. I'm just tired of this technolibertarian mindset of "it's not wrong because no one is stopping me from doing it". There is no "honor system" in life eith…

Unfortunately the winds are not blowing in your preferred direction. We are being shown time and time again and in increasing frequency that being an asshole is the best way to succeed.

Re: Nuclear: Desktop music player focused on streaming from free sources

#70
post #62
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's really a meme is: " I got 32 GB of RAM, who cares? " I see a parallel with networked services being developed and tested under "works for me" lab conditions without latency, jitter, or reduced bandwidth. "It works fine on my 10 Gbps network, who cares about 2 extra MB of Javascript?" For one, because the very moment you have that line of thought, you're probably already an outlier.

You would be hard-pressed today to find computers with less than 8 GB of RAM. 300 MB is 3.66% of 8 GB of RAM. Which, again, is absolutely nothing. Okay, let's assume you have a computer with 4 GB of RAM. Still 7.32%. That is low.

Missing the point. When developers dont have to give a shit about resource usage it can become a problem. When every app is using way more ram/memory than necessary it starts to add up.

This is why modern programs and games can barely run on modern hardware in many circumstances. There is no incentive for devs to be efficient.

It's not one program using a lot of memory. It's 45 of them all using way more than they need to. It adds up.

Post reply on HN