Even if we talk about mere separation, this can and will absolutely destroy Alberta even if it is “successful” - the lack of credit history as a country will by itself cause epic hyperinflation and a near-complete collapse in government spending of any kind for the two or three decades it needs to build that credit history.
Businesses - especially small and medium ones - will flee the new country, as they require stable political and financial environments in order to flourish. Only large corporations will flourish as they capture and control the entire political process to benefit only themselves via kleptocracy.
Plus, all resources will auto-revert back to the Canadian government, forcing Alberta to buy everything at current market values in order to do anything beyond the top 12 inches of topsoil.
Additionally, native treaties can and will tie everything up in the courts for decades, causing Alberta to spend untold millions to sort it out… if it even ends up being successful at doing so.
Finally, it can no longer bully the rest of Canada into allowing it to have environmentally risky oil pipes across our land. BC could shut down all such pipes at a moment’s notice for whatever reason, and Alberta would be at our mercy unless it could airlift the oil out.
Any kind of a split is just a financial bait-and-switch by the hyper wealthy to disenfranchise the working class. They want to put trickle-up-economics on steroids.
The point is being able to write it once with web developers instead of writing it a minimum of twice (Windows and macOS) with much harder to hire native UI developers.
And HTML/CSS/JS are far more powerful for designing than any of SwiftUI/IB on Apple, Jetpack/XML on Android, or WPF/WinUI on Windows, leaving aside that this is what designers, design platforms and AI models already work best with. Even if all the major OSes converged on one solution, it still wouldn't compete on ergonomics or declarative power for designing.
Lol SwiftUI/Jetpack/WPF aren’t design tools, they’re for writing native UI code. They’re simply not the right tool for building mockups.
I don’t see how design workflows matter in the conversation about cross-platform vs native and RAM efficiency since designers can always write their mockups in HTML/CSS/JS in isolation whenever they like and with any tool of their choice. You could even use purely GUI-based approaches like Figma or Sketch or any photo/vector editor, just tapping buttons and not writing a single line of web frontend code.
Who said anything about mockups? Design goes all the way from concept to real-world. If a designer can specify declaratively how that will look, feel, and animate, that's far better than a developer taking a mockup and trying their hardest to approximate some storyboards. Even as a developer working against mockups, I can move much faster with HTML/CSS than I can with native, and I'm well experienced at both (yes, that includes every tech I mentioned). With native, I either have to compromise on the vision, or I have to spend a long time fighting the system to make it happen (...and even then)
Yikes. I spent 15 years developing native on both mobile and desktop. If you think that native has the same design flexibility as HTML/CSS, you're objectively wrong.
By design, each operation system limits you to their particular design language, and styling of components is hidden by the API making forward-compatible customisation impossible. There's no escaping that. And if you acknowledge that fact, you can't then claim native has the same design flexibility as HTML/CSS. If you don't acknowledge that fact, you're unhinged from reality.
There's pros and cons to the two approaches, of course. But that's not what's being debated here.
The real disconnect is that the user doesn't really care all that much. It's mostly the designers who care. And Qt for example but also WPF let you style components almost to unrecognizable and unusable results. So if everyone will need to make do with 8GB for the foreseeable future, designers might just be told "No.", which admittedly will be a big shock to some of them. Or maybe someone finally figures out how to do HTML+CSS in a couple of megabytes.
I recently switched from Spotify (well known Electron-based app) to Apple Music (well known native app). The move was mostly an ethical one, but I must say, the UI functionality and app features are basically poverty in comparison. One tiny example, navigating from playlist entry to artist requires multiple interactions. This is just one of many frustrations I've had with the app. But hey, it has beautiful liquid glass effects!
In short: iteration time matters. Times from design to implementation, to internal review, to real user feedback, and back to design from each phase should be as fast as possible. You don't get the same velocity as you do in native. Add to that you have to design and implement in quadruplicate, iOS design for iOS, Android for Android, MacOS for Mac, Windows design for windows. All that is why people use Electon.
The point is you can be lazy and write the app in html and js. Then you dont need to write c, even though c syntax is similar to js syntax and most gui apps wont require needing advanced c features if the gui framework is generous enough.
Now that everyone who cant be bothered, vibe codes, and electron apps are the overevangelized norm… People will probably not even worry about writing js and electron will be here to stay. The only way out is to evangelize something else.
Like how half the websites have giant in your face cookie banners and half have minimalist banners. The experience will still suck for the end user because the dev doesnt care and neither do the business leaders.
But the point isn’t that they’re more different than alike. The point is that learning c is not really that hard it’s just that corporations don’t want you building apps with a stack they don’t control.
If a js dev really wanted to it wouldn’t be a huge uphill climb to code a c app because the syntax and concepts are similar enough.
We're not doing Electron because some popular software also using it. We're doing Electron because the ability to create truly cross-platform interfaces with the web stack is more important to us than 300 MB of user memory.
> We're doing Electron because the ability to create truly cross-platform interfaces with the web stack is more important to us than 300 MB of user memory.
It's closer to 1GB but trust me, everyone is well aware of your priorities.
You should check the memory use of that browser tab. You’re not saving much either way running in a browser or in Electron, which is effectively a browser.
Who cares about 300Mb, where is that going to move the needle for you? And if the alternative is a memory-unsafe language then 300Mb is a price more than worth paying. Likewise if the alternative is the app never getting started, or being single-platform-only, because the available build systems suck too bad.
There ought to be a short one-liner that anyone can run to get easily installable "binaries" for their PyQt app for all major platforms. But there isn't, you have to dig up some blog post with 3 config files and a 10 argument incantation and follow it (and every blog post has a different one) when you just wanted to spend 10 minutes writing some code to solve your problem (which is how every good program gets started). So we're stuck with Electron.
There's a world of difference between using a memory safe language and shipping a web browser with your app. I'm pretty sure Avalonia, JavaFX, and Wails would all be much leaner than electron.
The people who hate Electron hate JavaFX just as much if not more, and I'm not sure it would even use less memory. And while the build experience isn't awful, it's still a significant amount of work to package up in "executable" form especially for a platform different from what you're building on, or was until a couple of years ago. And I'm pretty sure Avalonia is even worse.
It likely would use less, and doesn't use a browser for rendering.
> And I'm pretty sure Avalonia is even worse
Definitely not
> The people who hate Electron hate JavaFX just as much if not more
In my opinion, I only see this from people that seem to form all of their opinions on tech forums and think Java=Bad. These are the people that think .NET is still windows only and post FUD because they don't know how to just ask for help.
If the alternative is memory-safe and easy to build, then maybe people will switch. But until it is it's irresponsible to even try to get them to do so.
Like what? Where else (that's a name brand platform and not, like, some obscure blog post's cobbled-together thing) can I start a project, push one button, and get binaries for all major platforms? Until you solve that people will keep using Electron.
“The early bird might get the worm, but it’s the second mouse that gets the cheese.”
Apple is hanging back, waiting for mousetraps to be triggered as AI companies make mistakes that could not have been reliably foreseen. Then it’ll swoop in, adopt the best bits, and put out a product that is immensely polished and easy to use.
That has been, after all, one of its most important strategies over the years. They realized that early adopters only became industry leaders if their error rate remained low enough to keep ahead of those who let others make mistakes for them.
Unless the big universities “expand” by linking up with the regional colleges, giving them a branding cachet that will attract students, there is one group that will benefit enormously:
Conservatives.
They require an uneducated and ignorant electorate. It’s the only way they can hoodwink voters into voting against their own best interests.
If you want “papers, please” every time you back out of your driveway or go beyond your government-assigned oblast, then your suggestion is the digital version of the physical authoritarian nightmare that was imposed by totalitarianist regimes throughout history.
People have a right to complete anonymity, and should be able to go across the majority of the Internet just as they can go across most of the country.
That’s what you are missing.
Don’t get me wrong, I am also in favour of a single government ID, but in terms of combatting identity fraud, accessing public resources like single-payer healthcare, and making it easier for a person to prove their identity to authorities or employers.
It should not be used as a pass card for fundamental rights that normally would have zero government involvement.
I walk out my front door in the UK and I am not anonymous. Every transaction I make either identifies me through bank, railway or other id, or quite simply by my face standing in front of the coffee seller. My walk down the road is observed by neighbours and postmen.
Should my government arrest me without cause or trample on my free speech rights, I get that’s a problem but I am not sure why being anonymous helps. Having rights upheld by the courts helps, well trained police who respect the law helps.
I am honestly open to debate on this but I do find the “what if Hitler took over government where would we be” to be a problematic argument not a final answer.
> Should my government arrest me without cause or trample on my free speech rights, I get that’s a problem but I am not sure why being anonymous helps. Having rights upheld by the courts helps, well trained police who respect the law helps.
You're suggesting the same government that would violate your rights would then help prevent it? I don't follow. Any power structure (tiered or not) was wiped away by authoritarians, historically. They will not be helping in the worst case. Ideological capture (corruption) has already started eroding at UK rights and that took a much less overt effort. America has had a robust 3-branch system (executive, legislative, judiciary) corrupted by a singular cult of personality. THAT was highly unlikely to happen, but here we are.
With this being said, I do predict that anonymity on the web is going to be phased out. It will result in all sorts of changes to cultural norms across western nations that largely will curtail rights. I dread it.
Shouldn't we try tracing IP addresses and fining organizations for letting the traffic through or originating the traffic first? Seems a lot simpler.
Sorry maybe I should be clearer - the problem of tyrannical governments is not solved by being anonymous online, or indeed any technology that makes it hard for government to do the tyrannical things. Safety lies in an engaged citizenry that reacts to fundamental threats. The protests against the ICE in Minnesota being an example.
>>> It will result in all sorts of changes to cultural norms across western nations
I quite agree - but I (hope / think) that the benefits can outweighs the downsides if done well. Those nations that do it well will I believe find a rocket like boost to society and industry perhaps akin to post 1945 world. Those who don’t will fall behind.
> Every transaction I make either identifies me through bank, railway or other id, or quite simply by my face standing in front of the coffee seller. My walk down the road is observed by neighbours and postmen.
Are these the government? Is the bank the government? Is the rail company the government?
No? Then you have answered your own question.
A silo of identification between you and a service provider that uses the provider’s own tooling is still anonymity from government authoritarianism.
The fact that nearly all of these silos are leaky IRL - with the government eager to punch howitzer-sized holes through them for even more access - is not the point. It is a citizen-hostile flaw that needs patching through loophole-proof legislation, not an ID system that would violently eradicate any remaining separation of government from capitalism.
Remember: when government and capitalism rides in the same cart, it is called corporatism, and is the basis of Fascism. Which is what is happening to America.
The problem here is that pretty much every part of modern life has been government and capitalism riding in the same cart - from cities installing electric power stations 100 years ago, to roads and inventions like the transistor and internet itself was government and private capital working towards common goals.
The issue is we want “good” government and “good” corporate behaviour but not the bad. And knowing the difference especially ahead of time requires engaged citizenry, lots of feedback mechanisms that are not overwritten by corruption and noise in the mechanism (ie primaries materringnmore than elections is a feedback mechanism fail in my book)
> The problem here is that pretty much every part of modern life has been government and capitalism riding in the same cart - from cities installing electric power stations 100 years ago, to roads and inventions like the transistor and internet itself was government and private capital working towards common goals.
And here is your argument’s fatal flaw: mistaking public works, that benefits the commons and society as a whole, with government tracking.
Just a sec - you said:
“”” Remember: when government and capitalism rides in the same cart, it is called corporatism, and is the basis of Fascism. ”””
The implication being when gov and big business get together bad things do happen. My point is they can happen yes, but also same players can make good things happen - it depends on the players (and regulatory and reporting and voting and and and )
Government tracking can be good - tracking covid cases good, tracking criminals planning robberies good. It it can also be bad.
This is imo why this is such hard problem - there is no clear answers only something we want sensible courts to (quickly) decide upon based on good laws.
> Just a sec - you said: “”” Remember: when government and capitalism rides in the same cart, it is called corporatism, and is the basis of Fascism. ”””
>The implication being when gov and big business get together bad things do happen. My point is they can happen yes, but also same players can make good things happen - it depends on the players (and regulatory and reporting and voting and and and )
I think you need to go back and take some elementary courses on economics and how governments operate.
Public works are not “government and corporations in the same cart”. If that’s what you are coming to, that only demonstrates your ignorance bleeding out all over the place.
Taking a 2024 report on bot loads on the Internet is like taking a 1950s Car & Driver article for modern vehicle stats.
That’s how fast the landscape is changing.
And remember: while the report might have been released in 2024, it takes time to conduct research and publish. A good chunk of its data was likely from 2023 and earlier.
One of the biggest problems with this story is Karen phoning back and asking him to stop the fax.
Sorry, but faxes don’t work like this.
A fax takes in the entire transmission over the phone line, ends the call, and then - IF it has been set up to do so, instead of just storing the fax - it prints it out.
Which means that Karen had every ability to tell her fax to stop the print job herself. A fax is not like a printer, where the sender has the ability to tell the printer to pause or cancel the job. Once the fax starts printing, that original communication - the phone call with the fax transmission - has long since ended.
And if this fax machine can retrieve faxes from a fax server elsewhere on the network or on the Internet, that communications disconnect is even more severe.
Which makes me very suspicious of the entire story.
> It runs a 1.5Ghz Celeron processor with completely passive cooling (the whole computer is a heatsink),
The whole case is the heatsink. The exterior case, and not the SSD or the mainboard or the RAM or any of the other parts; only the case.
“Computer” is the case + everything inside of it.
This irritates me just as much as when people say “my body is sweating”. Like, NO. It’s not your body that’s doing that, it’s your skin. Your internal organs aren’t sweating to cool you off, only your skin is. Your body as a whole might be overheating, it might be sending the signals to your brain to start the cooling process, but it is your skin that is actually doing the cooling. That’s your skin’s job. It’s the only organ who can do that job.
Even if we talk about mere separation, this can and will absolutely destroy Alberta even if it is “successful” - the lack of credit history as a country will by itself cause epic hyperinflation and a near-complete collapse in government spending of any kind for the two or three decades it needs to build that credit history.
Businesses - especially small and medium ones - will flee the new country, as they require stable political and financial environments in order to flourish. Only large corporations will flourish as they capture and control the entire political process to benefit only themselves via kleptocracy.
Plus, all resources will auto-revert back to the Canadian government, forcing Alberta to buy everything at current market values in order to do anything beyond the top 12 inches of topsoil.
Additionally, native treaties can and will tie everything up in the courts for decades, causing Alberta to spend untold millions to sort it out… if it even ends up being successful at doing so.
Finally, it can no longer bully the rest of Canada into allowing it to have environmentally risky oil pipes across our land. BC could shut down all such pipes at a moment’s notice for whatever reason, and Alberta would be at our mercy unless it could airlift the oil out.
Any kind of a split is just a financial bait-and-switch by the hyper wealthy to disenfranchise the working class. They want to put trickle-up-economics on steroids.
reply