• 1 Post
  • 101 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle



  • orangeboats@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    Servo was an experimental ground for Mozilla in some ways (like testing out a new CSS engine and porting it back to Gecko if it works). So it’s quite normal for people to be unaware of it, it was not meant for the public.

    But later on it was abandoned by Mozilla and stuck in a limbo, until it got picked up by the Linux Foundation. Now it’s a standalone project and I wish them well. We really need a new FOSS web engine.




  • Yeah I get the display server part. What I meant was that 200% scaling gets you 1920x1080 logical resolution on HiDPI applications – LoDPI applications continue to be blurry just as if you set your actual resolution to 1080p, but HiDPI applications will enjoy the enhanced visual acuity.

    Even on smaller screens like the 14" ones, the quality of very high resolution (e.g. 4K) is still quite visible IMO, especially when it comes to text rendering. But it could very well just be my eyes.





  • The modern electronic devices are far more railroaded than it was back in the day tho.

    Want to download an application? There’s the App Store. No need to download random .exes from sketchy websites (and learn what a “computer virus” is the hard way)

    Downloaded a picture? It’s instantly inside your gallery. Back then we needed to find a folder called “Download” or “My Documents” using something called the Explorer!

    iPhone and Android made a lot of things dumber and easier to take in, but I feel like it had a detrimental effect on digital literacy.





  • orangeboats@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@programming.devJavaScript
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is why I try my damnedest not to write in weakly typed languages.

    string + object makes no logical sense, but the language will be like “'no biggie, you probably meant string + string so let’s convert the object to string”! And so all hell breaks loose when the language’s assumption is wrong.



  • I have a 64-bit computer, it can address up to 18.4 exabytes, but my computer only has 32GB, so I will never use the vast majority that address space. Am I “wasting” it?

    You are using the addressing bits in the form of virtual memory. Right now. Unless you run a unikernel system, then in that case you could be right, but I doubt it.

    Anyway, this is apples and oranges. IP addresses are hierarchical by design (so you have subnets of subnets of subnets of …), memory addresses are flat for the most part, minus some x86 shenanigans.

    Yes they are all “used” but you don’t need them. We are not using 2^128 ip addresses in the world.

    But we do need them! The last 64 bits of your IPv6 addresses are randomized for privacy purposes, it’s either that or your MAC address is used for them. We may not be using those addresses simultaneously but they certainly are used.

    Despite that, there still are plenty of empty spaces in IPv6, that’s true. But they will still be used in the future should the opportunity arise. Any “wastage” is artificial, not a built-in deficiency of the protocol. Whereas if we restricted the space to 40 bits, there will be 24 bits wasted forever no matter how.


  • You’re not “wasting” them if you just don’t need the extra bits

    We are talking about addresses, not counters. An inherently hierarchical one at that (i.e. it goes from top to bottom using up all bits). If you don’t use the bits you are actually wasting them.

    you can gradually make the other bits available in the form of more octets

    So why didn’t we make other bits available for IPv4 gradually? Yeah, same issue as that: Forwards compatibility. If you meant that this “IPv5” standard should specify compulsory 64-bit support from the very beginning, then why are you arbitrarily restricting the use of some bits in the first place?

    If you’re worried about wasting registers it makes even less sense to switch from a 32-bit addressing space to a 128-bit one in one go

    All the 128 bits are used in IPv6. ;)


  • Every time there’s a “just add an extra octet” argument, I feel some people are completely clueless about how hardware works.

    Most hardware comes with 32-bit or 64-bit registers. (Recall that IPv6 came out just a year before the Nintendo 64.) By adding only an extra octet, thus having 40 bits for addressing, you are wasting 24 bits of a 64-bit register. Or wasting 24 bits of a 32-bit register pair. Either way, this is inefficient.

    And there’s also the fact that the modern internet is actually reaching the upper limits of a hypothetical 64-bit IPv5: https://lemmy.world/comment/10727792. Do we want to spend yet another two decades just to transition to a newer protocol?