You wouldn’t download more RAM, would you?
Search GTA 6 Requirements
Submitted 2 months ago by Zenoctate@lemmy.world to [deleted]
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/42d039d7-2b3b-41e1-a18a-72177fa2037d.jpeg
Comments
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 months ago
Una@europe.pub 2 months ago
I did
A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You’re a rebel and you’ll never be any good
TachyonTele@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Lucky. I can’t find any on a website for cheap.
cmgvd3lw@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
I did, it also came with a local milf.
JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org 2 months ago
I don’t disagree with this. Software’s performance enshittification is maybe non intentional per-se, but it’s pretty obvious that devs don’t think they need to optimize until it’s confirmed that their software is insufferably slow. And I mean their software has to be so slow that it loses them customers in droves.
LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
devs
More like managers
JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org 2 months ago
True, though it’s a mix of culpability. We wouldn’t be in this situation if devs quit over poor managerial decisions. Devs keep their heads down and do the dirty work, so they’re also culpable in these trends. They don’t deserve defending, they deserve a wakeup call.
boonhet@lemm.ee 2 months ago
When possible, use open source software that isn’t developed by commercial entities (yes that also disqualifies all real browsers available - maybe Ladybird will be different? But then the specs themselves for the web are so bloated it takes too long to implement them and you have to cut corners).
Thing with for-profit development is that micro-optimizations don’t make fiscal sense. Say it takes 10 seconds for an API call. That’s too long if it’s supposed to be an interactive website! You spend 4 hours getting 9 seconds off by improving multiple problematic methods. Now the next 900 milliseconds? Maybe that’ll take you 10 hours. Fun? Absolutely, I live for that shit. But in most commercial environments this would be considered a waste of time because I could spend it doing something more impactful.
And anything being twice as fast or memory efficient is usually not noticeable. If you’re going to optimize something, it should be at least an order of magnitude. Therefore everything but low hanging fruits often gets ignored. Usually it’s a case of reconsidering your data structures to be able to use better algorithms, or reconsidering the business requirements to get rid of some processing that could be avoided. The former requires architectural insight not every developer has, plus agreement among devs. The latter may require outright navigating office politics to get product team to drop some low business impact feature requirement that has high impact on performance.
Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
you really need people that want to make good software to get good software, i only use foss for the same reason
idk if ladybird will get better performance than the others though, i honestly think it’s a web framework issue more than a browser issue, barebones lightweight browsers like netsurf are perfectly usable on well made sites like the arch wiki
stewi1914@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Sometimes optimizing code comes at the cost of extra time and effort, but I often see projects bury themselves with pointless complexity that slows both development and execution down.
If developers didn’t have this stupid idea that they need to be typing to be productive, we could save a lot of pain. Sure you might see a solution to a problem that e.g. uses a sorting algorithm, and you can pretty quickly pull a perfectly fine sorting algorithm out your ass in a minute, but what if sorting is completely unnecessary?
Questions like “can I remove the need for sorting” are never asked, and instead we waste time answering questions like “what is the fastest sorting algorithm”.
Sometimes spending an entire day staring into the screen without writing any code is exactly what’s needed to save time and produce a better solution.
DmMacniel@feddit.org 2 months ago
Remember when games and applications were actually optimised? But yeah 32 GB of memory isn’t that uncommon anymore, now is it?
cadekat@pawb.social 2 months ago
Hjalamanger@feddit.nu 2 months ago
502 bad gateway 😭
cadekat@pawb.social 2 months ago
Guess it was a bad time to download more RAM
MTK@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Just be careful, I once downloaded some bad ram that wrecked my PC, since then I onky download locally sourced, free range RAM.
superkret@feddit.org 2 months ago
Doesn’t matter how happy the RAM supposedly was, you still pay for someone to cut it up into bytes and solder it into a chip.
No one needs RAM anyway, you can easily live off CPU cache and SSD space.
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 2 months ago
I would’ve accepted just the Windows logo for “poison” but adding Google Chrome was a nice touch.
Zenoctate@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I stole thus meme. Credits to OOP
Matriks404@lemmy.world 2 months ago
There’s a reason why modern browsers have multiple processes. Each tab and extension is sandboxed for stability and security reasons.
Also Firefox tends to use similar amount of RAM as Chrome, and it’s silly that it’s only Chrome is being making fun of.
stebo02@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
this but with ads
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
Did you know? You actually can download more RAM by assigning your google drive as swap space.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The masochist in me wants to try this.
cicadagen@ani.social 2 months ago
Boot up time: 7y