I support the choice of AGPL. I wish more software used it.
Whenever I use AI to write code, in my experience it invariably chooses the MIT license. For example, for all the ansible roles that I've written using AI it put the MIT license in the meta file, unless otherwise prompted. It makes me wonder if it comes from RLHF.
I find your comment off-putting. I think it's a great example of bikeshedding. Do you have anything to say about OpenJev the project, or just the bikeshed?
I see you've edited your comment to remove the part about the vibecoded website being disrespectful towards humans. As a human I find these types of comments about the vibecoded websites, when the submission is not about the website, disrespectful.
Do you have anything to say about OpenJev, which is not about the website?
Yes. These jev-copy projects are all vibecoded, and only mimic the shape of output. Typesafe's documentation is excellent and provides developers with guidance on what exactly to expect from their model. It's also clear that typesafe developed a generalist model that they've tested to work across domains and use cases.
Using libraries like this provide none of those assurances. Sure, you can improve performance with fine tuning , but then we're going back to doing what a model like jev was created to eliminate.
> Rustdesk is considerably more performant than the VNC family
It consumes, on the client, 800%-1200% CPU AND 8%-10% GPU decode on my NVIDIA card. I opened a bug and they transformed it into a discussion, without any response.
Better is subjective. What is the bottleneck or resource allocation you're trying to overcome?
Going on what the poster above says about CPU and memory - if the network speed or bandwidth allocation is the bottleneck, then trading CPU and memory utilisation increases for lower bandwidth is likely acceptable. If, however, the device is low end and tying up memory and CPU with compression would lead to sluggish or impaired task performance but the network has adequate overhead for lower levels of compression or higher levels of data transfer then higher network utilisation would be preferable.
Please detail in what ways rustdesk "makes better use of the resources", so as to conclude that it is more performant. I'm curious to understand your perspective, since mine is very different.
I honestly don't have the experience to speak on whether it's actually more performant or not, since I don't trust networked screen sharing (I use a wired capture card exclusively). The only time I ever use networked remote desktop is when I can't be bothered to hook up the cables, or when I'm not physically close to the machine.
However, I would say that high CPU or GPU usage is not necessarily an indicator of bad performance, especially since higher utilization can mean better performance.
Ironically, Google's own Pixel line is the only reliable source of phones I know of that's both unlockable and relockable with your own keys. The latter is an important feature that even the "hacker friendly" brands like early OnePlus skipped out on.
Hopefully the hardware vendor GrapheneOS is working with can add a second product line to the list.
Some of the ones that seem unlockable are actually not unlockable in practice. Like Xiaomi which provides an unlock option that doesn't work unless you work for Xiaomi.
> Software engineering’s obsession with precise terms is actually one of the things I’m glad is dying with ai automation.
Yes. The next time you go to your doctor you should hope he's not being overly precise; or the engineer that builds the bridge; or the software engineer that implemented the embedded software in your insulin pump.
There is no precise thinking without precise terms.
reply