Mithaldu

48 ms·

451.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
The only useful feedback here is "throw it away and start from scratch without chrome". This is however not "constructive feedback". And wrapping it in any layer of nice words won't change its core nature of not b
452.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
They could've said it nicer, but i don't think there's a constructive way to say "either rewrite it without electron or start whittling down the electron code-base to remove all the stuff your app doesn't use".
453.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Any Electron app, like Chrome, will run at least 3 processes, Cerebro even runs 5. However the default windows task manager doesn't group processes by child/parent relationships so the other processes Cerebro uses are further down
454.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
> If the app is memory hogging, not following best coding practices, or you have a cool idea of how something could be done instead share that feedback and offer better ways to do things. In spirit i agree with you. In practice the probl
455.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
You miscounted something, it uses 210+MB on windows: http://i.imgur.com/EXSAKEK.png
456.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Fwiw, i work on windows and also reject anything electron that isn't designed to be started, do a thing, and closed quickly.
457.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
> I would guess a browser is just not optimised for a use-case comparable to Cerebro (running as a daemon). That's pretty much it. There's no useful way to make electron slimmer in any way, since it comes with the full chrome b
458.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
I'm sorry for further discussing here, and would prefer to do this in private if you care, but i feel quite frustrated with you seemingly accusing me of having done something i cannot perceive even when trying to look for it, and thus
459.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
I agree the deeper part of the thread was useless. That's why i stopped participating. However: All i did was try to give him the benefit of the doubt until it was clear he was trolling. If things like this bother you, i recommend actu
460.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Talk to soldiers, talk to police officers, talk to marines, talk to any professional who's ever experienced actual battle. Ask them: Would you feel confident to use your gun when you're relaxed in a social setting and someone sudd
461.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
That is not the argument I made and you continuing to attribute that to me is bad faith. Please review: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13723962 vvv E: holy shit, your willingness to be absurd about this is mind-boggli
462.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
There probably was stealth, given that in Kansas anyone can carry concealed, it's likely the terrorist did that.
463.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
That's not the argument i'm making, and i feel i stated it perfectly clearly in the earlier post.
464.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Sure, especially given Kansas doesn't have to worry about shark attacks due to low amounts of sharks within its borders, but should worry about guns due to the absolutely preposterous amounts of them within its borders.
465.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Basic physics. Guns make it easier to achieve death of others. All other things being equal, less guns = less deaths, more guns = more deaths. Kansas makes it worse by not even pretending to restrict guns to anyone of any mental disposition
466.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Haha, yes?
467.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Sorry i wasn't more clear: Gun possession increases the frequency of deaths due to terrorist attacks.
468.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/kansas-law/kansas-gun-control-l... "In 2015, for instance, a law was passed allowing Kansas residents to carry a concealed firearm without a permit or training." I could likely fi
469.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Did you ask her if she's aware that her fears are real, but not entirely rational? It's possible to feel fear due to prejudices against certain people, be aware that is irrational, but still be powerless against the fear. I person
470.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
> there are dozens of terrorists acts every day Yes, that is correct. You recognized that well. Have a gold star.
471.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Please tell me you mean this as a joke. D:
472.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Please read my post again, i said "tell someone ... they're being absurd". Operative word being "tell". Feel free to think it, feel free to correct them kindly, but if you actually tell them those words then you ARE
473.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
It is perfectly well-known how to avoid such things: Stronger gun control to raise the difficulty of achieving death of others; state-enforced education levels with low to zero cost. Sadly these things run counter to the convictions of a lo
474.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
It's quite unkind to tell someone who's feeling fear because a murder happened that they are being "absurd".
475.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
Can we please stop pretending to be surprised and shocked that this is a thing people in general do? It wasn't even funny anymore 10 years ago and nowadays is one of the most tired comments possible.
476.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
The problem isn't the changing part. The problem is that if there are any shared passwords or patterns you have, they are now stored forever in their database. One can't only act after going through, one has to change all their pa
477.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
The frightening part about your post is that you might not even be trolling.
478.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
After having educated myself with the help of people smarter than me on what you mean with the Syria comment: Your trying to claim your statement is equivalent to mine is silly. Syria is a conflict zone where the government has lost control
479.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
I didn't vote for anyone, i'm a German. As to the question: I don't believe any other candidate would've had less people dead in the relevant conflict areas. Further, Obama himself wasn't actively aiming to have civ
480.
by Mithaldu 10y ago
I'm not entirely sure how exactly you get to that exact end result from her. To answer that i'd need to know more. Think you can provide an explanation?

More ›