News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

AbusiveHNAdmin

Re:“Clean” Code, Horrible Performance on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @05:20PM (#34975745)
"So by violating the first rule of clean code — which is one of its central tenants"

The word is TENET. Tenants rent stuff.

Re:Every Graphics at Once: Nintendo's Popeye on Monday February 27, 2023 @08:50PM (#34964679)
Cool article. I didn't like this game, but I was always impressed by the smooth scrolling when the screen bounced in response to Bluto jumping around. It gave the game a "big-budget" or arcade-quality feel, which frequently distinguished arcade games from home adaptations. This despite my having an Atari 800, whose hardware provided silky-smooth fine scrolling and sprites.

The glow of multicolor game characters on a CRT just brings back the excitement of arcades. I wonder if anything has that kind of entertainment value for kids today.

Re:FCC Considering Banning Transfer of Online Consent Forms on Thursday February 23, 2023 @11:24PM (#34920736)
AT&T has to be among the worst. These jagoffs would send me no fewer then three texts at all hours of the day or night to simply tell me there was nothing with my account. No exaggeration: They would badger me repeatedly to say that my bill auto-pay had succeeded... and then that I could save $5 by signing up for auto-pay... and some other inexcusable nonsense.

I logged every call I made to them, during many of which they swore they'd stop it. Eventually they started claiming that they couldn't. I had to block AT&T's number on my phone.

How execrably stupid do they have to be to send "everything's fine" texts over and over and over instead of, at the very most, sending an E-MAIL?

Re:Lucy Ives' Retro Homepage on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @11:07PM (#34891507)
Not this ID, and not yet.

But thanks!

Re:Lucy Ives' Retro Homepage on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @11:07PM (#34891502)
The downvotes prove my point.

Pathetic.

Re:Lucy Ives' Retro Homepage on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @08:40PM (#34890413)
If the OP hadn't created an intentionally obscure title, we wouldn't be left to speculate.

But hey, this is Hacker News; and douchebaggery like that gets a free pass, while those who simply ask for better titles get canceled and "shadow-banned."

Re:Lucy Ives' Retro Homepage on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @08:15PM (#34890192)
Yep. It's called The Literacy Project.
Re:Lucy Ives' Retro Homepage on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @06:13PM (#34889103)
Is what or who? The rest of the title is missing.
Re:Open source solution replicates ChatGPT training process on Monday February 20, 2023 @11:31PM (#34876607)
Thanks for the reply.
"Imma?"
Re:Open source solution replicates ChatGPT training process on Monday February 20, 2023 @03:27AM (#34866217)
The graph titled "Comparison between Colossal-AI and current major open source projects in the same period" has no label on the Y axis, which shows quantities in thousands. WTH?
Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Sunday February 19, 2023 @06:46PM (#34863124)
Yep.
Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Sunday February 19, 2023 @03:35AM (#34855663)
Why are you telling ME this? I never said trashing app bundles clears out property collections or settings.

You must be replying to the wrong person.

Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Saturday February 18, 2023 @02:56PM (#34850431)
It isn't supposed to, of course. But there should be a standard facility offered by the OS that well-behaved apps can use to install components, through which the OS WILL log each of them and be able to remove them later.

The main challenge is shared libraries; these are hard to delete reliably, even if the installer keeps a "use count" that it can increment and decrement. Just one non-compliant dependency will be broken if you remove all the compliant ones and a lib it needs gets blown away.

Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Saturday February 18, 2023 @02:46PM (#34850337)
I agree. How is that "helping me out?" I never said dragging stuff to the trash should do that. I said there should be an UNINSTALLER, which is the whole topic at hand here.
ChatGPT is actually an intelligence test: OpenAI requires that you give them your phone number to use it. So if you use it, you've already failed.
Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Saturday February 18, 2023 @12:17AM (#34844149)
No. That's the big lie pushed by Apple apologists for 20 years: "You just drag apps to the trash, and YIPPEE! They're all gone!"

These are the same apologists that mocked Windows for needing device drivers, as if the Mac didn't. Since Windows 95, when you plug a new printer into a Windows machine, it detects it and offers to look for a driver. What did OS X do for, oh, half its existence? Nothing. You'd plug a peripheral in and nothing would happen. It was up to you to scrounge around for a driver disk and explore it for an installer. THAT one, at least, Apple has remedied.

But to go 20+ years since the OS X transition without an uninstaller is absurd.

And sure enough one of said apologists down-modded and FLAGGED these simple observations. Then ran back to Reddit, I hope.

Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Friday February 17, 2023 @09:36PM (#34843271)
No. That's the big lie pushed by Apple apologists for 20 years: "You just drag apps to the trash, and YIPPEE! They're all gone!"

These are the same apologists that mocked Windows for needing device drivers, as if the Mac didn't. Since Windows 95, when you plug a new printer into a Windows machine, it detects it and offers to look for a driver. What did OS X do for, oh, half its existence? NOTHING. You'd plug a peripheral in and nothing would happen. It was up to you to scrounge around for a driver disk and explore it for an installer. THAT one, at least, Apple has remedied.

But to go 20+ years since the OS X transition without an uninstaller is absurd. Then again, Apple is the company that forced you to manage all the content on your handheld Unix computer with a POS jukebox application... which it didn't even write.

Re:Making macOS Apps Uninstallable on Friday February 17, 2023 @09:30PM (#34843234)
supporting uninstallation ≠ locking down
Re:China’s police are ensnaring thousands of suspects abroad on Thursday February 16, 2023 @05:00PM (#34827072)
I said PAYWALLED, which was true, and there was no alternate link.

Why UP-vote inaccessible content, and then go apeshit when someone points it out?

Hacker News is degraded by this infantile, hypocritical behavior. Why perpetuate, let alone PROMOTE it?

Downvote the inaccessible CONTENT, not the remark about it. DUH.

It's about two things for Apple:

1. Wringing extra revenue out of every possible angle 2. Preventing developers from doing anything unforeseen; a longtime Apple mania

Re:China’s police are ensnaring thousands of suspects abroad on Thursday February 16, 2023 @02:14AM (#34815947)
Paywalled. Why post this?
That doesn't make sense.
Not necessarily. Tons of audio-connector cables stopped working overnight when Apple pettily disabled them. One end of the cable was Lightning, and the other two ends were USB A and a 1/8" stereo audio plug.
That's because all those third-party vendors probably went out of business or abandoned Apple. I had lots of Y adapters to work around the problem Apple created but never solved: There was no way to charge the phone AND use an asinine headphone-jack dongle. The answer was a simple cable, with no power source.

Overnight, they all stopped working because Apple wasn't getting its fee from those manufacturers.