Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ray023's commentslogin

I understood the point of Tauri is to write the apps with Typescript and web tech and to NOT have to write Rust or even know Rust. So why would it need to be ported to Swift when the point of Rust in Tauri just so the devs themselves or the wider community can write the base and plugins and stuff in Rust and the apps the general dev writes with it are written in TS?

I looked at Tauri like an Electron alternative that in the future will run with Servo under the hood.


"Don't knowledge it" because he did not put a stupid TM sign in every blog posts he writes mentioning Node.js is a stretch.


There’s no acknowledgment of Node.js trademark on Deno.com … and the landing page is largely about how much better Deno is over Node.js.

Of all places to put trademark acknowledgement, it’d be there - and it’s missing.

https://deno.com/


VERY discouraging to anyone considering being a white hacker. "Likelihood low" and only 5k bounty for this is pathetic.


This is exactly that by thought was. This solves nothing what the traditional VPN or TOR is used for. It's like running an exit node from your hope IP address. You do not want to do that.


I LIKE this. Why would you not use a distro if it just removes packages? Or force closed source on you if it's legal to install the binaries? I do not know it's the same on Ubuntu, but I consciously made the decision and typed out the valkey package. If I would not know now about all the BS and would just want Redis I would LOVE for my distro to just install a replacement without me noticing anything. Maybe with a little hint and conformation message during install why this is happening and that is it. Hats off to Fedora maintainers, this is how you make the end user happy!


"We heard from some customers that it is easier for them to operate under an OSI-approved license, so we’ve added that option." ROFL.

Yeah, translation. We got the biggest backlash ever from the license change, the community HATED us so much for this. THIS is why we backpedaled.

Valkey was created and already took over Linux distro package distributions with easy AF drop in replacements installs. I installed Valkey on my VPS for a WordPress Object Cache and I just installed the package, did not even need to edit any file or anything, just runs and works and the WP plugins for Redis just thinks it's Redis. Besides the name as an end user, literally nothing changed. Valkey got a massive interest and if clearly became obvious that it made zero sense, and it was the wrong decision.


Well, obvious question: How does it compare to Plausible and all the other open source analytics.


Plausible is too needlessly expensive as one grows and it essentially punishes you for growing.

And some features aren't available 1:1 with the CE version of Plausible either.


Yea, funnels are not open source for Plausible


Check out our demo at https://demo.rybbit.io/1. We have a lot more features than Plausible, but they're still presented in a way that is intuitive to use. You shouldn't need to read pages and pages of documentation to be able to set up funnels on rybbit, for example.


Dude wastes the FSFs time, complains about wrong license without telling them the one he wanted. Then complains again that he needs to recover from the HORROR of using the postal service that was a deliberate, POINTLESS CHOICE. Gets fame on Hacker News for it.

YAY!


I hope the future is bright with AV1. But even scene groups heavily release in 265 instead of AV1. Hardware support is going to get better over the years and hopefully everyone will just use AV1 and leave this license BS behind.


> But even scene groups heavily release in 265 instead of AV1.

I believe this is because scene groups don't really care about patent licensing, and there's around 5-6 years of computers with hardware H.265 decoding and no hardware AV1 decoding. I think we'll see AV1 and successors take over in 5-10 years when it's safer to assume users will have AV1 decoding.


> I hope the future is bright with AV1.

I bought an Intel Arc A580 and then later B580 which also has an AV1 hardware encoder, and I have to say that it's really pleasant, good enough for real time streaming, video recording even at lower bitrates (e.g. 1080p30 at ~10 Mbps is okay) and ends up saving a lot of space when compared to both H264 and H265, which previously wasn't viable because the CPU based encoder is painfully slow.

I saved a few hundred GB of space by re-encoding all of my local videos in AV1, I'm guessing it might be have been one of the better cases because most of the videos were anime instead of more detailed video like regular movies, but it worked out nicely for me! Plus, the software support is also quite good: OBS and Handbrake had no issues, neither does VLC seem to have any.

All of that makes me wish it'd become more widespread in the next decade or so, everywhere from YouTube and Twitch to even our phone cameras.


> 1080p30 at ~10 Mbps is okay

FWIW Most Streaming TV Services like Zattoo do 1080p50 using H264 using that Bitrate and while not perfect it's fine - using AV1 one could probably go way below that.


1080p30 at ~10 Mbps isn't a low bitrate unless you are aiming for something very specific. Not to mention there is H.265 hardware encoder inside Intel Arc, although I have no idea about their quality. Nvidia seems to do a much better job in this area.


If you record a video game, I find that anything much lower really messes with the visual quality, especially if it portrays a forest scene or something with lots of detail like snow. Admittedly, you have to zoom in to notice and it's more apparent during fast movement, though VBR and other options seem to help.

The H265 encoder is also lovely, from what I've seen! Bigger file sizes, but a bit more software support in some places.


I'll continue to use h264 because it has hardware acceleration on my Thinkpad X220, whereas x265 doesn't enjoy the same luxuries on this laptop.


It might be time to consider some new hardware. That machine is going on 15 years old now!


To be honest, if a 15 year old machine is still working fine for somebody, and h.264 is fine (if you don't care about HDR/4k, it really sort of is!), I'm not sure the benefit of suggesting somebody junk a machine


I have considered, but so far there's no other hardware which has this form-factor with Libreboot support (although I'm unsure whether the X230 has x265 hw accel)


AV1 is extremely slow to encode last time I tried.


My guess is you were using the reference AOM encoder. This is actually a real branding problem! It was never designed for encoding speed, and it shows.

SVT-AV1 is the production encoder you should be using. It's high quality and fast in software, and should really always be the default.


It is not a branding problem. Only in recent few years has SVT caught up to AOM in terms of encoding quality.

Using SVT for encoding in the early days is basically trading quality for speed.


For now most of the focus has been on the slow encodes, but in theory it can match h264 for speed and quality on encoding. In practice I've seen it get very close already.


Because scene groups are still done by enthusiast that actually cares about encoding quality rather than patents licensing.


vp9 is widely used (e.g. YouTube is mostly vp9, av1 and fallback h264) and not much worse


I avoid AV1 sources for anything I care about, because of film grain synthesis.


Does AV1 just emulate the film grain from the source video, or are people adding/customizing the grain when encoding?


Emulates it, which strikes me as extremely silly. The original grain is in the film itself, it's part of it, it's what the image is made of. Fake grain is just noise. Either denoise it or keep the real grain, I have no interest in fake grain.


Can't you turn it off in the player and get the denoised version?


Probably? Though I don't think those kinds of controls are exposed in most of the players I use (usually set-top box video players). Besides, if I'm dealing with a 20 to 80GB 4k copy of something that originally had grain, I prefer it still be present—if I'm dedicating that kind of space, the point is fidelity. If I'm dealing with something smaller than about 8GB 1080p, I probably don't really care what it looks like aside from preferably not having obvious artifacting, so I guess AV1 would be OK in that case, though all else being equal I'll still pick h265 just to avoid the fake-grain concern entirely.


Why? It's a feature you have to explicitly turn on when encoding, and I've not seen people using it for most stuff.


I can't know if it was used in advance, so favor h265. Which is far more common (and so's h264) so it's not much trouble to avoid AV1.


including digital footage with film grain added in post?


I don't watch a ton of films with noticeable fake grain. Even the ones that do fake it, it's barely perceptible, so I wouldn't care on those—not many of them are emulating the huge, obvious grain of high-sensitivity '60s and '70s film, for instance. A lot of what I watch is from the '90s or earlier, so the grain's real.


Brave has its own Rust based Adblocker BUILD IN. That is at the very core of the Browser, uses the exact same filter lists uBlock Origin and all the other use. There is no point in using uBlock origin in Brave at all. I have been using Brave for years now and the adblocker pretty much like uBlock. Never looked back. I think it even inspired by uBlock but the fact they can even integrate it tighter with Chromium makes more then than an extension written in JS.


uBlock Origin does a bit more than applying community maintained filter lists though. I regularly use its capability to add custom filters for instance. Is that also possible in Brave?


Yes


For now. We’ll see how long it takes for them to integrate their Brave Bucks for either enabling the blocker or whitelisting ads.


We would not do that on principle, but imagine we're the mustache twirlers you fantasize we are: we'd light our brand on fire doing any such thing, lose all our lead users, stop growing and start shrinking. Think / Type / Post is the Ready / Aim / Fire analogue you seek.


I know that you probably went with Chromium based on the way your relationship with Mozilla ended, but man... I'll never have a Chromium based browser as my daily driver, I simply never trusted the ad company to not do what they ended up doing in the end (killing ad blockers). Brave will always be a no go for me for this reason. And now more than ever, we really need some company with real fire power to take the reins of the Firefox source code and create a real trustable fork.


Separate reply that ritual impurity or blind black-box rejection of open source Chromium/Blink seems also to suffer from emotionalism over reason. See

https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-...

This is a choice we made. As I wrote in my last reply, I think we would have died trying to get Gecko/Graphene with a Web front end up to competitive scratch vs. Chrome (nm Firefox).

A Firefox fork would have gone over badly with some potentially large number of Mozilla/Firefox fans, and we'd still lack key elements not part of the Mozilla open source (at the time, e.g., Adobe's CDM for HTML5 DRM). On the upside we'd have more UX customizability.

But our choice of Chromium/Blink (via Electron, so we had Web front end upside without Firefox extensions) was not a slam dunk choice. It involved trade-offs, as all engineering does. One downside is we have to audit and network-test for leaks and blunders, which often come from Chromium upstream:

https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/1898529583546421322


Huh, I was under the impression that you were forking Chromium itself instead of building over Electron. Or are you talking about a past, post-Gecko decision that had to be dropped as well?



No, we started with Gecko (on Graphene, a sandboxing multiprocessor framework from b2g/FirefoxOS). We switched for hard-nosed wins of Chromium (as part of Electron) because out of the box vs. Gecko, most rows in the spreadsheet favored Chromium decisively. This is covered in

https://brianbondy.com/blog/174/the-road-to-brave-10

Why do you write "probably... based on... relationship ended"? Brave as a startup does not have time for feels not realz, pathos-over-logos nonsense. I recommend you avoid it in your work efforts too.


Thanks for the replies. I did not knew that you started with Gecko. Anyway, Brave is my go to advice when a regular user asks for a mobile browser, it just works out of the box. Not for me, and I still hope to see a Firefox fork becoming the main Chrome competitor in the future.


Firefox reborn will be a tough turnaround job —- Ladybird could be the better path.


I get it. I run FF as my primary browser (mostly because I don't want to see the internet devolve into a Blink mono-culture).

But, I always recommend Brave for less-technical folks. It just works! My FF setup includes a number of extensions, some of which need a bit of tuning to be useful. Then you have to deal with issues in websites that just don't properly support FF, etc. My grandmother can install Brave and simply start browsing. Things just work without extra config or tinkering.


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

Search: