471–480 of 481 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Very few people with LinkedIn profiles read the social feed. Even fewer post things to it. Yes, but many of the people who matter in professional domains do. Much like all social media, the prolific few who do post have outsized influence, and engaging with them can often be to your benefit.
Could you please name a couple persons who matter in their professional domain, who post on LinkedIn, and who you benefited from by engaging with them on LinkedIn?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I didn't set the bar to 70kB The GP to your original did set the bar at 70kB, mattmanser then explained that images and fonts easily exceed that, and then you called that poor resource management. Sounds like we're on the same page here, but you seemed to have missed the context of the comment you initially replied to.
> The GP to your original did set the bar at 70kB It didn't, here's the comment in question: > A probe collecting data in space takes It makes no mention that an app should be under 70kB. It just note that 100MB is still *enormous* compared to 70kB. And I maintain that the difference cannot be explained by images and font cache alone.
It can't be explained by images and fonts alone, I agree, but images and fonts alone are still enormous compared to 70kB. On my screen an "e" on this site is 10*11 pixels. Subpixel positioning means we need at least 6 copies of each letter, subpixel antialiasing means we need three channel alpha (3 bytes per pixel), we have variations of bold, italic and bold-italic, 95 printable letters in ascii, that's a low-ball of 750kB for one size of one font. This comment page alone has 4 different sizes, I'd expect a chat app to have a few more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I would rather post on any other social media site at work than Linkedin. It's a major signal that the person is looking for work.
I can’t imagine working in a place toxic enough where: 1. That’s the default presumption (rather than someone doing networking for their current role) 2. Where “looking for another job” is a point of contention Any good senior engineer should be keeping in touch with others in the industry. And good teams are made up of people with good communication skills who want to be there.
Back in the ancient days of the web, browsers allowed you to set resource limits (ram, cache, etc) to prevent websites from hogging the limited resources of your desktop system. It's really a shame that all major browsers have since decided that you as a user should have almost no control over how much ram and storage any arbitrary website can consume now.
This is a fantastic claim. I've been making web pages since the '90s and using web browsers just as long, and I can't think of a single instance of this. Perhaps it existed and I never knew about it? Can you provide some evidence for where and when this was the case?
Given the web of the 90s didn't include tons of overly complex javascript most of the settings were targeted at how much ram/disk was used for caching website assets IIRC.
It's the principle of the thing though - we should have the ability to set resource allocation limits instead of potentially handing our entire computer's resources to a random website just because we clicked on a URL.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The GP to your original did set the bar at 70kB It didn't, here's the comment in question: > A probe collecting data in space takes It makes no mention that an app should be under 70kB. It just note that 100MB is still *enormous* compared to 70kB. And I maintain that the difference cannot be explained by images and font cache alone.
> And I maintain that the difference cannot be explained by images and font cache alone. It can't be explained by images and fonts alone, I agree, but images and fonts alone are still enormous compared to 70kB. On my screen an "e" on this site is 10*11 pixels. Subpixel positioning means we need at least 6 copies of each letter, subpixel antialiasing means we need three channel alpha (3 bytes per pixel), we have varia…
[1]: Realistically, you're never gonna have all 95 characters in all weights for all font size, so the actual number is going to much significantly lower than the theoretical envelope. In practice, there'll be a main (font,size), that will have all glyphs (and it's going to be more than 95 because of the ligatures) in normal weight and no italic, with a subset of the glyphs in the three other modes, most likely not evenly distributed between modes. Then you'll have additional fonts (for UI labels, titles, etc) that are going to have much less represented glyphs and almost no variations of weight or italic if at all. Obviously the font(s) used for titles in going to have a bigger budget relatively to the glyph sample size, because each one is bigger than your baseline "e"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my favourite LinkedIn cranks is a consultant guy who suggested an addendum to Einstein that "Has the potential to impact the future: E=mc²+AI". Because, so he says, "This equation highlights the potential for AI to unlock new forms of energy, enhance scientific discoveries and revolutionize various fields such as healthcare, transportation and technology". It got a lot of traction with the algorithm due to lot…
Either he doesn't understand mass-energy equivalence or is delusional enough to believe ChatGPT can affect the laws of physics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or another process will die at random instead, which might be your desktop environment, the main browser process, Signal (10% chance at corrupting message history each time), a large image you were working on in Gimp... Firefox has gotten very good at safely handling allocation failures, so instead of crashing it keeps your memory snugly at 100% full and renders your system entirely unusable until the kernel figures…
That's not how it works. Process killing is one of the last ways memory is recovered. Chrome starts donating memory back well before that happens. Try compiling something and see how ram usage in chrome changes when you do that. Most of your tabs will be discarded.