3 ms·
A person creating a codec doesn't choose if it's globally adopted. System implementors (like for example Slack) do. You're don't have to tell the open source de
by viraptor 3y ago
A person creating a codec doesn't choose if it's globally adopted. System implementors (like for example Slack) do. You're don't have to tell the open source dev anything. You don't owe them to include their implementation.
And if their contribution was to the final system, sure, it's the owner's choice what the threshold for acceptable contribution is. In the same way they can set any other benchmark.
> Your same argument can also be used to degrade the performance for all other groups,
The context here was Pareto improvement. You're bringing a different situation.
- shwaj 3y agoThe grandparent provided an argument why we might not want to use an algorithm, even if it provided a Pareto improvement. I suggested that the same argument could be used to say that we should actively degrade performance of the algorithm, in the name of equity. This is absurd, and illustrates that the GP argument is maybe not as strong as it appears.
- viraptor 3y agoThe argument doesn't make sense in practice. We could discuss it as a philosophy exercise, but realistically if the current result is better overall and biased against some group, you can just rebalance it and still get an overall better result compared to status quo. Changing codecs in practice takes years/decades, so you always have time to stop, think and tweak things.