News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

asudghionbio

Re:Firefox 58 on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @02:17PM (#16216547)
That's a fair point. I've always found Firefox pretty speedy, but I can't judge other people's experiences and I don't think it's possible to objectively measure subjective user experience. Every piece of software has people who have unusually bad experiences and I don't know how to judge which are reliable and representative. The best you could do is polls, which are not reliable.

I don't know how to tell the difference between "Firefox is slow" and "Firefox has an undeserved reputation for being slow."

Re:Firefox 58 on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @02:04PM (#16216358)
"It doesn't work on my machine" is a new one.

The benchmarks have always been respectable. I'm sure there are some configurations that made it work poorly, and that's a problem. That isn't true in general.

I wish people were more willing to use rational numbers in programs. Rather than leaving something as 1/24, people almost always perform the division and wind up with a float.

I've never seen rationals in a codebase. And that's a shame, because they do some things elegantly.

>that completely disregards the actual value of the blockchains

It doesn't. I just think the value of blockchains is near zero. I have yet to hear of any problem that isn't better solved with a normal database.

No floating point whatsoever. That's the "application-specific" part of "application-specific integrated circuit."
Nothing. This is all specialized silicon which is totally worthless for anything except mining Bitcoin. It's all going in the dumpster when the price crashes.

It has no social value and never will.