Readit News logoReadit News

Dead Comment

Dead Comment

Dead Comment

RumourRider commented on Don't animate height   granola.ai/blog/dont-anim... · Posted by u/birdculture
troupo · a month ago
> You are being disingenuous. I can always use some hyper specific example

These are not hyperspecific examples. We're literally discussing under an article which has a primitive animation which was, quote, "using 60% CPU and 25% GPU on [a] M2 MacBook"

How is 2D graphics programming helping there?

The article goes on to describe, correctly, layout properties ("The W3C spec is full of these!"), paint properties ("this tiny "bikeshed" SVG which you can find on lots of W3C spec pages. It costs ~30% CPU!") and composite properties.

These are not specific examples. These are literally footguns upon footguns that literally have no corresponding counterpart anywhere.

> That doesn't mean that understanding what is typically happening is useless. Which is essentially what your claim is.

Yes, knowing 2D graphics programming is 100% useless to understand what's happening with CSS and DOM.

RumourRider · a month ago
> These are not hyperspecific examples. We're literally discussing under an article which has a primitive animation which was, quote, "using 60% CPU and 25% GPU on [a] M2 MacBook".

No we are not. Someone asked about how one learns some techniques that the OP mentioned (that were simpler than the ones given in the article). I gave some general advice on how one should think about what is happening and some general advice about how to think about performance.

Then you are pretending that none of this is relevant because you are concentrating on the hyper specific stuff in the article (which we are no longer talking about).

I also disagree that this cannot be reasoned about by learning a bit about how graphics works, Cartesian coordinate system and literally turning on the paint flashing tool that is in dev tools. It is literally obvious what is happening when you see it.

> Yes, knowing 2D graphics programming is 100% useless to understand what's happening with CSS and DOM.

In fact it was very helpful to help me to understand what was happening. I literally said to myself "wait a minute, that is kinda like this thing I did in SDL 1.2 in university". You are literally telling me, that something I know to be useful isn't, because you say so. That is unreasonable.

RumourRider commented on Don't animate height   granola.ai/blog/dont-anim... · Posted by u/birdculture
troupo · a month ago
Which draw calls result in "changing border width will cause a full page re-flow in some browsers, and bot others"?

Which draw calls are "literally any animation will cause the full re-flow of the document unless you make sure an element is not a part of the document, but then you'll have issues with positioning, weird gaps etc."

Which draw calls teach you that "well, this primitive animation consumes 15% of CPU, but will only consume 6% if you go out of your way to make it 'performant'"?

RumourRider · a month ago
You are being disingenuous. I can always use some hyper specific example to disprove any statement about what is generally true. That doesn't mean that understanding what is typically happening is useless. Which is essentially what your claim is.
RumourRider commented on UK backing down on Apple encryption backdoor after pressure from US   arstechnica.com/tech-poli... · Posted by u/azalemeth
weavejester · a month ago
> No. My point is that in the UK we do not have freedom of speech enshrined in constitution or law.

We do, in the Human Rights Act 1998.

Now, you've said you don't believe that the definition of freedom of expression in the HRA and ECHR lines up with your definition of free speech. That's fine. You are of course welcome to that opinion.

But you act as though your definition of free speech is authoritative, and yet you also have not defined it. When I've prompted you to narrow it down, you avoid the question.

So let me ask you extremely directly: what's your definition of "free speech"? Or to be more precise: which restrictions on speech are allowed, and which are forbidden, in order for a country to have "free speech" in your book?

RumourRider · a month ago
> We do, in the Human Rights Act 1998.

No we don't. I've explained why. It even says in the text of the law the caveats it carves out.

But you can believe whatever fantasy you like. I am tired of trying to convince the fish that they are indeed swimming in water. The funniest thing is that until you've had it affect something/someone you like or respect, you won't change your mind.

BTW, I used to make all of the same arguments as you do btw about the Human Rights act and the ECHR etc. I realised after actually reading them, and seeing what actually happened and how the state operates, that what I believe was all bollox and I had been deceived.

> Now, you've said you don't believe that the definition of freedom of expression in the HRA and ECHR lines up with your definition of free speech. That's fine. You are of course welcome to that opinion.

It doesn't line up with any definition of free speech because it is a separate legal concept. I've already explained why they are different.

I happen to believe that legal concept is done deliberately so people like yourself will engage in this time wasting discussions about what is and isn't free expression. That is evidenced in this very discussion.

Ask yourself. If you happen to support Palestinian Action and do so publicly how long until police visit you or you are put on a watch list? Probably not long.

> But you act as though your definition of free speech is authoritative, and yet you also have not defined it. When I've prompted you to narrow it down, you avoid the question.

If I provide you with any sort of definition someone else will say "well that definition isn't correct", all of which ultimately deflects from the issue and is another waste of time.

The issue is that speech is restricted in the UK. It is done selectively. Some viewpoints are allowed by the British state and other aren't. Some of this is done directly, some of this is done indirectly.

e.g. There was a super injunction granted sometime last year to hide information about a large number of Afghan migrants / refugees / nationals being resettled after the Taliban took back control. Therefore the public, the press (little good they are) and presumably oppositional political parties couldn't scrutinise these plans. These types of super injunctions happen all the time.

What good is it that someone it is written on a piece of paper that you are legally able to have opposing view (as long as they fit inside the Overton window), when they literally hide information that is important for you to have any sort of informed view from you?

I asked you in my previous reply to go away and think about why certain narratives are presented to you. I never mentioned Trump, yet you seemed to want to talk about him without explicitly saying his name.

Someone somewhere wants you to worry about the press freedoms in the US. This is likely to distract you from more important things like the US have just landed some strategic nuclear bombers in the UK ahead of peace talks between Ukraine/Russia.

> So let me ask you extremely directly: what's your definition of "free speech"? Or to be more precise: which restrictions on speech are allowed, and which are forbidden, in order for a country to have "free speech" in your book?

It is irrelevant, I've explained why above. Any nation state will suppress your speech when it deems it to be necessary and will invent excuses as why it has to do it. That is the reality of it. How you choose to deal with that reality is your own choosing.

RumourRider commented on Unsafe and Unpredictable: My Volvo EX90 Experience   myvolvoex90.com/... · Posted by u/prova_modena
krapp · a month ago
They didn't say "is" they said "might be," which is a reasonable assumption to make given how ubiquitous the use of AI has become. One has to assume all content one encounters online is at best AI assisted and at worst entirely AI generated unless some explicit statement to the contrary is made, and even then, one should doubt.
RumourRider · a month ago
They are complaining about the hero image (which is pretty inoffensive). Which is ridiculous. It is no different than using a stock image asset for some decoration, which is what people would have used before the current AI tools. Therefore I consider it unreasonable on the face of it.

I shouldn't really have to explain this, but here we are.

I don't care about how you wish to split hairs because I made a minor mistake, nor do I care about your rationalisations for an obviously ridiculous critique.

RumourRider commented on Unsafe and Unpredictable: My Volvo EX90 Experience   myvolvoex90.com/... · Posted by u/prova_modena
bdamm · a month ago
It doesn't take much driving for a new EV to balance out the environmental cost of harvesting, shipping, pumping, and burning all that petrol. As I understand it, about 20k km or 15k miles, on average.
RumourRider · a month ago
It is still less environmental damage to keep an old vehicle on the road and not create a new one. Some cars can literally last forever (these models are well known) if they are looked after.

The scrap yards are btw filling up with modern cars quite quickly because people cannot afford to repair new cars, or the cars are uneconomical to repair even after minor collisions. Whereas a lot of old cars (pre-2010) can be fixed on your driveway with easily affordable tools.

RumourRider commented on Unsafe and Unpredictable: My Volvo EX90 Experience   myvolvoex90.com/... · Posted by u/prova_modena
hurrrr · a month ago
The best cars were built between 2000 and 2010. Pretty much the pinnacle of the internal combustion engine without all the millions of lines of buggy code that apparently no longer allow you to open your car freely.
RumourRider · a month ago
Yep. Many of them are still good and are on the road even with 100,000s of miles on them. Best car I had was a 2007 Vauxhall Astra. Did about 150,000 miles (and I really ragged it). Still on the road apparently. The 2012 Vauxhall Insignia I have isn't great and I regret selling the Astra. Will be selling that car soon.
RumourRider commented on Unsafe and Unpredictable: My Volvo EX90 Experience   myvolvoex90.com/... · Posted by u/prova_modena
smetj · a month ago
Understood ... thanks for clarifying ... I'm genuinely intrigued. You're right that image is generated by a generative model, however my humble blog content .... I do write myself. "Don't judge a book by its cover!" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
RumourRider · a month ago
The dude is being ridiculous. I use AI / Stock Photos for cover images. Plenty of people are fine with it.

u/RumourRider

KarmaCake day19July 22, 2025View Original