Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ghusto's commentslogin

That really isn't his gripe. In fact near the end he describes would have been a good direction for starting fresh.

His pain is that it's been 17 years and some basic core functionality is either still broken or entirely missing. It's not my expertise so I don't know if it could have been planned any better, but 17 years and _basics_ still being broken doesn't sound great.


I think part of the issue is that there's a couple of misconception about Wayland. Wayland focuses, exclusively, on being a window management protocol. Use cases such as screen sharing and accessibility are out of scope for such. Instead, they were supposed to be implemented through their own protocols. But those protocols didn't show up for a long while.

The developer response is more what I would describe as entitled, rather than the user complaints:

> Regardless, I simply don’t give a shit about you anymore. > > We’ve sacrificed our spare time to build this for you for free. If you turn around and harass us based on some utterly nonsensical conspiracy theories, then you’re a fucking asshole.

You haven't sacrificed your spare time. You've done a thing you wanted to do, and had a tantrum when it turned out it had consequences.

You want to do a thing, fine, but the moment it's forced on people you have taken on responsibility, whether that was what you wanted or not. Grow up.

> At this point I consider Wayland to be a fun toy built entirely to pacify developers tired of working on a finished legacy project

Pretty much this.


Why is the burden being put on the developers and not the distro maintainers that (potentially/allegedly) prematurely implemented the new(?) thing?

insert xkcd dependency comic


> the system was more likely to correctly identify men than women and it was “statistically significantly more likely to correctly identify black participants than participants from other ethnic groups”.

I am genuinely unsure what's going on.

My understanding of the article is that the system is problematic because it is more likely to correctly identify black people than "other ethnic groups". Is that right?


It's problematic for use in Essex as it works best for a small minority of the Essex population and has a much higher error rate for a typical sample of the Essex community.

Adendum: Essex Ethnicity breakdown- 85.1% White British · 5.2% Other White · 3.7% Asian · 2.5% Black · 2.4% Mixed · 1.1% Other · (2021).

from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex

ie: most accurate (however acccurate that is) for the men of 2.5% of the regions population

Not so accurate for 98.75% of the regions population.


Essentially (with made up numbers): 100 men on a high street, 4 of which are on a watch-list; 2 of which are black. Both black guys get identified, only one of the others does.

Ditto men vs. women, mutatis mutandis.


So it should be improved but sounds like it’s just catching criminals who need to be caught no?


Right so the answer is to improve enforcement not disable it and let more crime go unsanswred

[flagged]


As a case study, the Trump admin has done all those things (except the littering I guess) so I would say less likely since none of them have gone to prison.

The poor and marginalized tend to be incarcerated at much higher rates for lesser crimes than the richer and/or powerful whose crimes are much broader and more impactful on society.

The system in question in Essex is broken because it penalizes one race at higher rates than another race which commits the same crimes.


This is just a ridiculous attempt to bring Trump into an unrelated conversation.

No, it was to show how unreliable those criteria are as OP pulled the conversation into racial/cultural determinism.

Feel free to tackle the substance of any of my points.


The problem is that a likely outcome is that they will arrest two white men who are not the ones on the white list. That is discriminatory, at least if it keeps happening so that you get a higher rate of wrongful arrests of one group.

I wouldn't choose those words, but a 3% increase of something that's been steadily in decline is significant enough to warrant hyperbole of some kind.


> It's on the way out, though it'll be a slow death

At the very most, it's on its way out in the same way normal computers are on their way out for non-IT professionals. There are situations where wired is a must, not a preference (studios being the most obvious).

Aside from that, wired offers the highest sound quality possible, plug-and-play, and all at a lower price. Wireless headphones don't appear to even be trying to catch up.


The moment Trump said he'd like to have a say in the next _Ayatollah_, was when the knife went it.

Listen, we know you weren't in it because you're such a swell guy, we're not stupid. But now we don't even get what we were willing to bend over for in the first place (to get rid of the regime)?!


It's the Guardian. Not exactly known for it's unbiased and objective reporting.


I both agree with the sentiment, and believe it won't happen because the USA is past the point of no return.

I mean this with no direspect or cynisism, and hope I'm wrong, but I think that country has rotted too much for saving. You let it go too far for too long.

Then again the UK (repeatedly) went through some very dark times, and whilst not exactly a bastion of justice, we're doing a lot better now.


Correct me if I'm on a limb here, but didn't the UK truly embrace stupid, only after it lost its Empire status? While the US does it at its peak, which seems much more dangerous for, well everybody actually.


Hopefully. Everyone copied Apple without pausing to consider; "hey, does this make things _less_ usable?". Hint: yes, yes it does.


And now they're following Apple into maximalism again making it even less usable. As someone who did accessibility, minimalism did make it easier, it's hard to do maximalism right, one needs to use component extension and extensive styling rules for overlaps and bounding boxes versus a simple vector rectangle with revolved corners. I do miss the 2000s steel/gradient/font/faux 3d icewm-ish looks, they were pretty easy to pull off and didn't really hinder usability


I don't think people feel entitled to free entertainment, they're just tired of being so badly ripped off.

It used to be that you'd pay one company a little extra, and get all the extra channels you actually wanted. Now you pay multiple companies _a lot_ extra, and still might miss out on what you want.

Many people still remember the original deal.


They very much do. There's an Australian streaming service called Stan that bought the rights to the English Premier League this year. They post highlights videos to YouTube.

Every single video they post is full of comments about how short the video is, how it didn't replay this or that important moment, and finishes with an ad for Stan.

Compared to 20 years ago where the only highlights you could get for free were in a news program that might spare 1 minute for just the most important match if you were lucky, these videos are incredible.


Yes, I remember when Netflix was going to "save" us all from the cable company.

When there is only one streaming service, being subscribed to that streaming service means you get everything. Now there are 15 different ones to choose from, each licensed to show a different set of content.

Watching NHL hockey in Canada is a strange situation right now, but I'm not sure how it compares to the original cable situation.


Isn’t this every “disruption” story in a nutshell? The value being converted into consumer benefit is always a temporary situation.



"Disruptor" = temporarily embarrassed monopolist.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: