Arika

All the random emphasis makes YOU seem a little unhinged

If you use a Chromium based browser
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/animation-policy/ncigbofjfbodhkaffojakplpmnleeoee/
 
If you use Firefox
Type "about:config" in the address bar. Click "I accept the risk!" when it comes up. Find "image.animation" using the search box (just type "anim") Double-click "image.animation_mode." In the next box, type ether "once," so the animated GIFs only get one chance to play, or "none" so they never can.  
Safari:
https://github.com/matsadler/deanimator
 
obviously this will apply everywhere, not just the forum, but i think i remember this being suggested in the past, but Invision have no plans to ever actually implement it

Oh great... Another distraction while driving. 

Why it has Wifi antennas in the back is beyond me... Unless the point is to use public Wifi. But I would just go for 5G hotspot at that point. 
 
Also, why? And why not just Android tablet with suitable holder? What will PC do in normal car that tablet can't? Its way different for all those truckers with their setups. For one, they have much more space for the setup.

Paedophiles everywhere are in shambles.

I don't think he was either, but he's trying to put the blame everywhere but on himself. 
 
And you're falling for it with:
please tell me how is it "out of touch" to want a warranty for something you're buying? Linus is not your friend, he's the CEO of a company. Would you accept a tweet from any other company's CEO saying "we'll take care of it 100%" as warranty? or do you want it in writing and know exactly what the terms are?
 
Don't change your opinion on something just because it's Linus.

All the random emphasis makes YOU seem a little unhinged

All the random emphasis makes YOU seem a little unhinged

All the random emphasis makes YOU seem a little unhinged

given that muso seems to be an extremely rare case that says that it has to be for profit your argument is on very shaky ground.
 
You might have had a better argument in pushing the "it's not piracy if you only download and not distribute" as the aruments and laws are much more vague about that. profit on the other hand very rarely comes into it.

You could just achieve both, buy a MacBook Air. Unless we are going to start saying a MacBook Air is not objectively good in all metrics being compared, and you can get it with 16GB memory as well as the extra peripherals you mention. We can stay within the Apple product family for laptops in this discussion and be easily able to show why 8GB is simply a bad value for such a product.
 
Never ceases to amaze me how willing people can be to accept being nickel and dimed so needlessly. For all the arguments about how Apple devices are premium high quality devices befitting a higher asking price and value with high finish quality on the chassis, large batteries even though power efficient, premium screens blah blah it seems to stop at system memory, why? Are Apple customers not deserving of premium system ram capacities on their premium laptops with their premium features that they are often so insistent cannot be found anywhere else, or at least not for cheaper. Weird I say, weird.

yeah this has been known for quite a while now

https://support.apple.com/en-nz/guide/activity-monitor/actmntr1004/mac
 
Apple is using this metric for a specific purpose and it's not anything other than actually compressed memory. It is actually important to be correctly reporting this and not just have it as maybe it is maybe it isn't, some but not all.
 
Now that is a much better track to go down, at least it has some actual merit to it.  And yes "App memory" is a collective metric which contains both active memory and inactive. I think you need to go to terminal and use 'top' or other similar utility to get explicit active memory, that's how I would go get it anyway.
 
Practically speaking and going back to your example and assertion if we start up two Macs one with 8GB memory and the other with 16GB and open up Mail, Finder, Pages and Safari and did a little light usage both systems will be well off a high percentage of memory usage and both would be using the same heuristic, both are Mac OS, to determine what is active/inactive and when to compress it. It's only when memory utilization gets high will Mac OS preempt (as per their own documentation) the normal process and compress inactive memory it wouldn't have otherwise yet.  Despite your desire to keep insisting it is more complicated than it is, it's actually not. As long as we are confining this to Mac OS things are actually quite consistent even with vast differences in installed system memory. Mac OS simply and often takes inactive memory and compresses it because it's actually inexpensive and very quick on Apple silicon Macs, it was designed to be so. Target compression ratio is also the factor on how computationally demanding it is which would not be a high target in this use case.
 
This is exactly why I brought up Active Memory because that is the real factor in if 8GB is sufficient or not, as well as Cached. Operating systems simply do need Cached memory to maintain good operating and responsiveness and this is often pointed to when systems get tight on memory and people want "ram freeing programs" to release this cache because they think it'll help but it actually makes it worse. Anyway the more Apps you open and the more you do with them the higher the active memory will be along with Wired (which cannot be swapped or compressed) which is why I'm saying it's not the difficult to actually need, or be more correctly serviced with greater than 8GB system memory. And context here does play in to it, this is a $1600 laptop under the MacBook Pro product line. The nice little irk on both sides of the preference towards or away from the "Apple line" is the rhetoric around Macs being used for actual work and also "professional" devices. If we are going to embrace that yes MacBook Pros are devices for real work and professionals then it's not a stretch to assert that usage demands for greater than 8GB is not uncommon and being able to get by with 8GB is not acceptable for both a $1600 laptop and a professional device. You can ask any Mac user their experience of using an application like Microsoft Teams and you'll know right away that this application alone is a terrible memory hog and also sub optimal performance in general and corporate usage of Microsoft 365 and Teams is common. So even a regular Linux Systems Engineer or Administrator with a MacBook Pro who for the most part ssh in to Linux systems can easily get in to a situation of greatly benefiting from more than 8GB system memory even if only using terminal/xterminal, Teams, Outlook/Mail, Pages/Word, Safari/Chrome for Confluence+ITSM tool+Internal managment interfaces+vCenter etc without even getting in to more demanding use cases like local containers/VMs.
 
It's all well and good to just say if you know you need more then spec it with more and pay for it but my issue with that is the simple act of offering an 8GB option has a real cost to it and setting the minimum at 16GB would actually have a cost saving in multiple operating logistics and manufacturing aspects while only having a small increase in cost for DRAM. This I contend could either be absorbed in to the current price without any notable net margin difference for Apple or they could just slightly increase the base price of an amount less than the 16GB upgrade.
 
My issue is not that Mac OS with 8GB is or is not perfectly sufficient for many people it's on what specific devices this is offered on. There is an actual difference between a MacBook Air, MacBook and MacBook Pro. They do not all need to have 8GB options and they all have or could have more than one screen/chassis size option. I don't have an issue at all for example with the MacBook Air 13" M2 with 8GB memory for $1099.

i hope he makes a new series called "Some commas" and the only difference is the background is blue.

i hope he makes a new series called "Some commas" and the only difference is the background is blue.

I'm sure they do. They are also insane for accepting that 8GB of RAM on a $1600 laptop is not an absolute reaming regardless of whether or not they are using it all.

Did you use this news story as a platform to get on your soap box to spout about linux, RISC-V and africa? the topics you're going into in the "my thoughts" are barely even loosely connected to the main article

Holy christ
 

I ain't so sure about that name…

What bothers me is that OpenAI should have really been forced to change their name when they essentially went against the whole concept that had led to their name.
 
They are no longer open, they keep things close sourced (where at least some of the original intent was to keep it open) and operate it as a for profit company now essentially (sure capped, but when they have had billions of investment their capped means something like $100 billion) and ontop of that they already are censoring input based on certain stances.
 
I think things could be so different if they opened up the source, instead of controlling the API's.

Did you use this news story as a platform to get on your soap box to spout about linux, RISC-V and africa? the topics you're going into in the "my thoughts" are barely even loosely connected to the main article

This isn't flogging a dead horse, this is violently clobbering a trilobite. 
 
 
Back in the '00s, everything became terrorism. Domestic violence? Domestic terrorism. Insult someone? Verbal terrorism. 
The media industry has its own infatuation with theft. Copyright infringement? Theft. Not watching ads? Theft. 
 
And if this is about Linus specifically, at this point he has shown repeatedly that he won't backpedal from it, will play it down as minor terminology issues, and ultimately fish for the weakest counterarguments against his take when he feels like doubling down on it again. To be honest, some of the arguments you make may actually qualify as the next low hanging fruit for him to take down. But your very least point, among other stronger arguments to support the obvious where put forward by e.g. Louis Rossmann back in the day, to little effect. 

-This- is the funniest video you have ever seen?
That's rather depressing

-This- is the funniest video you have ever seen?
That's rather depressing

You can't compare GPU core clocks vs CPU core clocks.
 
My GPU runs at 1500 MHz core clock and can do way more work than my CPU running at 5100 MHz.
It's mainly because my GPU has 5888 cores and my CPU has 14 cores. Although you can't compare core count that way either. 
Hell, you can't even compare CPU clocks vs CPU clocks (or cores) if you aren't comparing the same architecture.
 
 
But let me tell you, you're dead wrong when you say a 200MHz processor would be fine for things like web browsing. Maybe if you're using the LYNX web browser, but use anything slightly modern that supports let's say JavaScript, images, and video, then you will be having a really awful experience running it on a 200MHz processor.
A 200MHz GPU might be somewhat fine depending on what site you are visiting and which CPU you got, but the CPU itself will make things in a modern browser painfully slow if it runs at 200MHz, no matter the architecture.
 
 
I admire your dedication to reducing e-waste, but your constant attempts at trying to spin positive news into negative ones because "they aren't positive enough" and your ridiculous claims are starting to tick me off. Your posts are incoherent ramblings that are very loosely connected to one another. Like in this case an article about Google extending support for their Chromebooks for some reason was:
1) Presented as something bad (how the hell is extending support for a product bad?). I am not sure what your goal with this post was, but if I didn't know any better and read the article, I might have gotten mad at Google for extending the support because I thought they did something bad. That's the opposite of what you want people to do if you care about reducing e-waste. You are misleading people into not supporting your cause.
2) Turned into a rant about how we should adopt RISC-V for some reason, you brought up human rights violations in Africa and Asia, for some reason. It's really hard to follow and it doesn't even seem like you're interested in discussing the news you yourself decided to post. You just used it as an excuse to post a rather incoherent rant about several things you are mad about. 
 
If you're an industry shill trying to make people dislike reparability then you are doing a fairly good job, because you are making me dislike the right-to-repair movement. It's quite similar to how I agree with a lot of what the vegan movement says, but would never want to consider myself a part of the "vegan movement", because I don't want to risk getting associated with the people in the movement I truly despise.