Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 481 posts

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#371

Post by saltyoldman »

zirkonit wrote: post #362
bluedino wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was probably an incredible amount of memory back then. And it probably cost $1,000 USD for 1KB. Who knows how much radiation-hardened space memory was. 10 times that?

In consumer space, 69 KB of RAM (138 x 4 kbit chips) would cost around $1700 70s dollars for the entire package, ~$10k in modern dollars. Radioationed hardened for space though — $50k-$100k in 70s dollars, roughly the price of a Silicon Valley house back then - $300k-$600k in today's money.

Wouldn't they just put a lead plate around the computer? That can't cost 100k in 70s

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#372

Post by Uptrenda »

I wonder how we might avoid this. It seems like often on this site we talk about matters of taste: like examples of good and bad systems. I wonder if there's a book focused on developing taste as an engineer, designer, etc in systems.

I've noticed that most books on software engineering are overly academic or focus too much on process. I feel like if you wanted to avoid something like the LinkedIn example you would need to make a meme book that was so simple, pervasive, and widely known that it could even reach an executive (for them to know whether or not work was actually good.)

That is probably like ... naive of me to say though.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#373

Post by Finnucane »

zirkonit wrote: post #362
bluedino wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was probably an incredible amount of memory back then. And it probably cost $1,000 USD for 1KB. Who knows how much radiation-hardened space memory was. 10 times that?

In consumer space, 69 KB of RAM (138 x 4 kbit chips) would cost around $1700 70s dollars for the entire package, ~$10k in modern dollars. Radioationed hardened for space though — $50k-$100k in 70s dollars, roughly the price of a Silicon Valley house back then - $300k-$600k in today's money.

consumer space and space space chips.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#374

Post by mysterydip »

saltyoldman wrote: post #371
zirkonit wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In consumer space, 69 KB of RAM (138 x 4 kbit chips) would cost around $1700 70s dollars for the entire package, ~$10k in modern dollars. Radioationed hardened for space though — $50k-$100k in 70s dollars, roughly the price of a Silicon Valley house back then - $300k-$600k in today's money.

Wouldn't they just put a lead plate around the computer? That can't cost 100k in 70s

lead being heavy, I wonder if that tradeoff wasn’t worth it?

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#375

Post by catcowcostume »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #319
dinkleberg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that the recruiters come to you on LinkedIn. This is quite handy when you're currently employed since opportunities come to you that you wouldn't have otherwise looked for.

Cool, even more reason to dislike it. I want my people doing their work, not wondering if the grass is greener somewhere else.

Your personal opinion does not (and should not) dictate how others behave.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#376

Post by apatheticonion »

This is the part about the "wasm won't replace JavaScript" argument I see being slept on and why I am so disheartened about how practically no progress has been made on it.

Most trivial apps don't need to be optimized, and for them, JavaScript is fine.

But for complex interactive web applications - it really fuggin matters.

Think; - vscode

- facebook

- jira

- linkedin

- reddit

There's no reason these applications should be slow, single threaded, and consume gigabytes of memory - but that's a limitation of the technology.

I know first hand that Atlassian has spent millions of dollars building bundlers in different forms just to save a few milliseconds of load time.

Just let me write the front end in Rust and if the browser detects that no JavaScript is running - don't start a JavaScript engine.

While you're at it, improve the SharedWorker story so I can effectively share data between tabs (enables cross tab sync, great for chat apps and local caching). I recently tried to make an offline-only application with a wasm-based sqlite implementation in a SharedWorker and the API just doesn't work.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#377

Post by joombaga »

userbinator wrote: post #321
tombert wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with most of what you said, but LinkedIn, at least at a superficial level, is the absolute worst to me. It's full of a bunch of inspiration-porn bullshit that I find unbelievably mind-numbing, but also people treat it like Facebook and post a bunch of political and divisive shit on there as well. I wouldn't care if people posted political and divisive shit, and I would really prefer to delete it, but now a lo…

now a lot of job applications require that you give them a LinkedIn URL. What types of jobs? I find that very hard to believe.

Software jobs for sure, but I've been applying for jobs with employers that have other types of jobs too (nursing, accounting, industrial engineering, etc.) and the requirement is not solely for their software jobs. Some have fields that pattern match (for these I put something like "https://linkedin.com/I_DO_NOT_USE_LINKEDIN") while others use an integration that actually require you to sign in to Linkedin (some of these I've created accounts for and then deleted them, some I've managed to bypass by hacking on the POST a bit, and others I've decided not to apply for).

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#378

Post by cosmicgadget »

conductr wrote: post #350
cosmicgadget wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much? You typically don't want more than a few different fonts on a given document. And neither fonts nor web images should be bigger than hundreds of kilobytes. How do we get to gigs?

> How do we get to gigs? Are you aware of what LinkedIn is? How the app behaves? While it’s obscene, I am not surprised at all.

Can you be more specific? Yes I am familiar with LinkedIn.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#379

Post by kulahan »

saltyoldman wrote: post #371
zirkonit wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In consumer space, 69 KB of RAM (138 x 4 kbit chips) would cost around $1700 70s dollars for the entire package, ~$10k in modern dollars. Radioationed hardened for space though — $50k-$100k in 70s dollars, roughly the price of a Silicon Valley house back then - $300k-$600k in today's money.

Wouldn't they just put a lead plate around the computer? That can't cost 100k in 70s

Lead makes things worse, not better. High-energy particles go straight through a couple mm of lead no problem, and lead itself is radioactive anyways. The problem is when a particle punches straight through a chip, leaving some energetic charge behind. You won't stop that with a paper-thin layer of lead.

Also, lead is extremely dense.

Re: LinkedIn uses 2.4 GB RAM across two tabs

#380

Post by heyethan »

conductr wrote: post #350
cosmicgadget wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much? You typically don't want more than a few different fonts on a given document. And neither fonts nor web images should be bigger than hundreds of kilobytes. How do we get to gigs?

> How do we get to gigs? Are you aware of what LinkedIn is? How the app behaves? While it’s obscene, I am not surprised at all.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN