I'm not sure I follow the criticism here. Is the issue that a paid product only supports Mac, or an open source project didn't build for multiple OSs?
If it's the first; I've seen tons of Mac only software due to the perception that it's a more lucrative platform. (Users are price tolerant for good products).
If it's the last; scratch your own itch. Since it's open source you can write the softer yourself. I'm not sure if this outlook is the diy zeitgeist I grew up in, or just being old. I'm curious if this is still a common belief.
Looking back, I could have phrased my original comment better, but my criticism is neither of those things. I'm just saying that as an open-source project that has an open-source specification, the author could make it clearer that an interested customer could buy one of these and write their own open-source Linux/Windows implementations as opposed to making it sound like "if you don't own a Mac, this product isn't for you."
Reading the comments, it looks like the author already made a command-line tool that might let the camera work on Linux; why not say that it's Mac-only but community support for other platforms based on the open nature of this camera is appreciated (and provide whatever links [eg. that command-line tool] that were mentioned in this forum)?
In case it helps explain the wording: I went with "exclusively for Mac" because I intended it to be an in-group signal to Mac folks that the product is high quality and conforms to the norms of the Mac platform. In my experience, cross-platform GUI software usually doesn't conform to Mac software conventions (and IMO just kinda sucks by Mac software standards). So my wording is trying to convey that the software isn't your typical cross-platform Electron/QT/GTK app.
Anyway, would love to add Linux support, just trying to figure out if that's what I want to do with my life right now.
"Our analysis of the relative importance of supply-side versus demand-side factors finds 60 percent of U.S. inflation over the 2019-21 period was due to the jump in demand for goods while 40 percent owed to supply-side issues that magnified the impact of this higher demand."
I've always found it interesting that econ discourse usually takes such a rigid view for the causes of phenomenon, if this were another quantitative discipline I imagine there'd be a softer position. Anywho, just chiming in to opine that the models for economics folks argue about is likely more nuanced than portrayed.
It's refreshing to see a company follow through on their promised use case. Especially since a lot of devices (home automation bridges, nas, media set tops, etc) are just purpose dedicated computers. I'd love for my next home server to be a laptop upgrade and 3d print away.
It depends on the person who owns it and the expense/level of effort required.
Some game collectors are motivated by the idea of owning something that no one else has. For decades, there were no preserved, shares versions of Marble Madness 2 available for that reason, but looks like that finally changed last year.[1] Akka Arrh was a similar case.
If a collector is interested in preserving and sharing, there's still the expense/effort factor. For an arcade game, they need to buy (or find someone with) specialized equipment, and may need to desolder chips from the board. I.e. there's a non-zero chance of destroying a one-off artifact, even when performed by people with experience.
The production ROMs for Discs of Tron have been preserved for quite awhile.[2]
However, if this was a test machine, it would be neat for someone with the necessary gear to dump it and see if the code is different.
Interesting to lump in teaching with policing. Even if you are correct, and the folks are the same caliber, the criticisms of both highlight the issues with the institutions. (The main thrust if the critique for police)
At any rate,this comparison is ridiculous and a false equivalencecy that could swap out nurses for teachers and hold your analogy.
Did I miss where the model size is? One shot rankings is nice, but it sounds like they're trying to build a proprietary alternative to other models, rather than focusing on outright competitiveness.
I wonder at the applicability of performance metrics for specialized models. (This is to be a personal assistant ai, right?) I'd think that either; 1. All models perform the same natural language understanding functions, or 2. Context matters a ton. If it's 1, then there's no need for a specialized model. If it's 2 then the relevance of performance metrics diminishes.
This also assumes a level of collaboration and mentoring I've yet to see as routine for Jr engineers. Even in person jr's reach out trusted contacts via chat as opposed to in person. If you've see this signal it might be culturally specific, or during a particular era.
From my experience, the divestment in training and mentoring, stringent job requirements, and lack of job security through arbitrary performance metrics have done more to make folks feel isolated than proximity to bodies.
