Was on my way to suggest this game to avoid, which is also available for free on desktop.

Man, anyone will do what you are suggesting to avoid! we will bear the sin together.

I suspect the latter.

> Seems similar to the JVM situation

Oracle was relying on behaviour that was POSIX valid so I don't see how it is "incorrect code".

Where did you get that it’s posix valid? Like link to posix spec? Or hearsay? I know what you mean but haven’t found such. (SIGTERM is catchable though so it does seem a bug/overkill sending SIGKILL instead of SIGSEGV or even SIGTERM.)

Good catch. I haven't found a proper source other than a quotation from some HN comment, so I'm not sure if it actually is POSIX valid or not, just that many people seem to think it is.

Depends. Does Apple promise POSIX compliance for current macOS?

I’m pretty sure they do, given that macOS is even still a Certified UNIX(tm).

Since the paid tiers have paid for the free tier for at least 9 years, I'd imagine that it shall remain available for at least a few more years.

> the old is well too old

What's wrong with the old Reddit UI?

It has usability problems with f.ex. collapsing a comment tree.

I returned to it last major reskin too but then they fixed the new to become usable.

Now they removed the middle version... they should have made recent.reddit.com for those that want to wait until new.reddit.com doesn't suck as much.

I haven't read the article yet but I think that means that UDP was used less than TCP and so routers/operating systems didn't optimize for it as much as they did for TCP. Hope this helps.

there's nothing to optimize with UDP, you put a datagram on the wire and off it goes. There's no sequence number like in TCP to re-order and construct a stream on the receiving side. There is no stream, it's UDP. You put a datagram on the wire and that's it. There no syn/ack either so no congestion control in routers, no back-off or anything.

Right that’s all it says on this subject. I am curious about what optimizations TCP has benefitted from that we’re not but could be applied to UDP.

For example various kinds of hardware TCP offload, like:

1. Handing the NIC a single blob of data (> MSS) in a single operation, and having the NIC do the segmentation into multiple packets.

2. Having the NIC detect multiple exactly consecutive TCP packets on the same flow, and merging them to a single receive operation.

Hardware offload is impossible to do for UDP, since neither the NIC or OS can assume anything about the payload semantics.

On a related note, is it a good idea to sell access to the same API your app is using under the hood? Why or why not?

Really? I used the website on Chrome on my Samsung Galaxy M12 (a fairly average smartphone) and the experience was fine.

If the user experiences stuttering while decoding a video, they won't learn to enable special permissions for the website but instead switch to a different browser that hasn't yet implemented this "feature".

And most websites most users visit will need the GPU to be remotely usable. For them enabling specific permissions for every website they visit is very inconvenient.