Ah, so there was a procedural issue in prosecuting the group with a cache of guns that wants to carve out a white nation out of Canada and the US. My mistake.
This doesn’t change the point that from the perspective of the Canadian government, they were facing 2 racist separatist groups at a time, and one of the groups was raising a LOT of cash while leading an occupation of the capital.
This is a valid scenario for seizing funds, though maybe the fact that groups like Diagalon and Wexit are a “meme” should be considered more closely.
In the case of Wexit, Tamara Lich was a founder, and she buddied up with Pat King for the fundraiser, who is a self avowed white supremacist, like he's literally on twitter saying white people have the "strongest" bloodline.
If someone who is involved with multiple "Canada for Canadians" movements joins forces with a known racist, I would take the odds and bet good money that person is a racist.
I also have an M1 with 16GB, what are you doing that you feel it's "normally under memory pressure"? I don't feel any memory pressure but I might not be able to see the signs, or have a different workflow (if you regularly edit photos, videos, 3D, ML, etc. then _of course_ the more RAM the better, but for normal webdev?)
If you open the Activity Monitor and switch to the memory tab you'll see a graph of the memory pressure at the bottom. I think it roughly reflects the degree to which the system is swapping out to the SSD?
On M2 16GB I recently accidentally ended up with Firefox, Chrome, Thunderbird, Spotify, Intellij, GoLand, VSCode, and Docker doing heavy builds in a cross-platform VM. Obviously unreasonable, but interestingly the system crashed with an SSD error.
I only use Docker for a compilation environment for Yocto, luckily I was able to find someone who had instructions for recompiling the image to aarch64 which runs super fast and efficiently.
It was horrible trying to run emulated, but I was sorting this out using the older version before Rosetta 2 was an option - does that make any difference?
Memory pressure on Mac means you get this popup saying "you must close one of these apps NOW or I'm going to crash". On 8GB that's indeed pretty common.
M-series 8gb MacBook Airs and 8gb MacBook Pros have now been in the market for years. The M1 Air launched in 2020.
Yet you'll still have the usual zealots on HN claiming that they have this exact device and it's horrible and worthless and swear blue that their experience is representative.
If the 8gb Air and Pro were a problem: you'd have heard it loud and clear. It would be on the news and called MemoryGate. TheVerge would dedicate a week on it, then bring it up every time apple launch a new laptop. Android9to5 would ring the figurative Apple deathknell and a flurry of lawsuits would be aiming for class action status.
This entire thread is a laughable nothing burger and it's only served to bring out the liars and those on an anti-apple crusade. Some people here have a brain disease that flares up the moment the word "Apple" is muttered.
No one is saying that the mere existence of the 8GB Macbook is a "problem". But it is disingenuous to claim that 8 GB unified memory = 16 GB regular RAM.
The reason why I write these responses is that I value merit-based discussions. Far too much cheerleading goes on in HN. I've said it numerously: It's very difficult to hold Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. accountable for actual transgressions when naysayers are just boys that cry wolf. These lot are self-defeating, no one worthwhile can take their opinions seriously because they don't apply them consistently and clearly have an agenda.
>No one is saying that the mere existence of the 8GB Macbook is a "problem".
This very thread is saying it ad nauseam - their issues being that (i) an 8gb computer shouldn't be labelled "pro", and (ii) that the 8gb models are irrelevant for serious work.
But onto the meat of the discussion:
While 8 is clearly not 16, Apple are obviously aware that the two numbers are not equal. Instead, what we have here in HN today is a disturbing number of disingenuous commenters who want to take that most absurd position on the statement.
The claim is evidently about how the user would perceive the performance and memory usage of the newer 8gb M-series macs versus apple's earlier 16gb intel models. It's not an unfair comparison and the article made numerous direct quotes about how apple make this claim; those points are being discussed by exactly zero people in this thread. It's also trivial to prove such a claim, so I doubt the majority of the commenters submitting their thoughts even clicked the article.
On a related topic:
A common speed test for smartphones is to simply run many 3rd party apps and multitask between them. These tests aim to demonstrate the real world performance of the device. Now despite having less ram that comparable flagships iPhones perform fluidly and outpace their Android counterparts, often significantly so.
What this underlines is that the performance of a device is not a mere sum of its basic parts. One can't look at a ram figure across different architectures and have an idea about the memory management of the device, or even its performance. A generation of computer users have grown up in a PC-monopoly and fail to grasp that different architectures lend to different efficiencies. Apple's approach here is enough to revisit that thinking.
> This very thread is saying it ad nauseam - their issues being that (i) an 8gb computer shouldn't be labelled "pro", and (ii) that the 8gb models are irrelevant for serious work.
First of all, there are exactly zero comments under the root comment of this thread that discuss the "pro" naming convention. There are comments discussing this in an adjacent thread but they account for only 10% of the total comments on this post.
Nor are there many comments regarding "8gb models are irrelevant for serious work". They exist, but make up only a small percentage of the comments on this post.
HN is really not as harsh on Apple as you think.
> While 8 is clearly not 16, Apple are obviously aware that the two numbers are not equal. Instead, what we have here in HN today is a disturbing number of disingenuous commenters who want to take that most absurd position on the statement.
Honestly, these people frustrate me too, but luckily as mentioned previously, they are really not all that common.
> The claim is evidently about how the user would perceive the performance and memory usage of the newer 8gb M-series macs versus apple's earlier 16gb intel models. It's not an unfair comparison and the article made numerous direct quotes about how apple make this claim; those points are being discussed by exactly zero people in this thread. It's also trivial to prove such a claim, so I doubt the majority of the commenters submitting their thoughts even clicked the article.
Nobody is discussing this because as you mentioned, the claim is trivial to prove. There is nothing to discuss, we all know the M1/2/3 is amazing!
> A common speed test for smartphones is to simply run many 3rd party apps and multitask between them. These tests aim to demonstrate the real world performance of the device. Now despite having less ram that comparable flagships iPhones perform fluidly and outpace their Android counterparts, often significantly so.
>
> What this underlines is that the performance of a device is not a mere sum of its basic parts. One can't look at a ram figure across different architectures and have an idea about the memory management of the device, or even its performance. A generation of computer users have grown up in a PC-monopoly and fail to grasp that different architectures lend to different efficiencies.
This is all very true, but it still doesn't mean 8GB == 16GB. Look, if you want to say "my device performs better than the other device even though it has less RAM", just say that, because it's true!
Be careful when looking at memory pressure and how much it is using. For the same kinds of things I do, it scales well between 128GB of ram to 32 and even 16 GB of ram. If you are using a 32 GB machine and seeing it has high memory pressure or used up most of the memory, it does not necessarily mean it won’t work well on an 8 GB machine.
To know if 8GB is enough, you often need to just try it and see. So that’s why I don’t want to put myself in that situation (that I’m running out of memory and the only option is to upgrade an entire machine.)
(It is because there’s many things aggressively using more memory to make things faster or more responsive by cache things. But those can be released under high memory pressure without much apparent performance loss. That makes use the memory more opportunistically but making it hard to gauge how much really is needed.)
"Enough" certainly. My newest Macbook Pro is 2013, so I have zero insight into the performance of the Apple Silicon devices, but the nature of software development is memory intensive in my experience. The biggest reason claiming "8GB == 16GB" is silly is that Apple doesn't have control over many of the programs that people are using (much as they would like to).
Maybe Xcode makes spectacular use of their own hardware, but do we believe that these optimizations are present in Chrome and Photoshop and Docker and Emacs (hahaha) and whatever NodeJS tooling and probably more that many developers are using at all times? I really, really doubt it. Unless the memory compression discussed here is capable of 50% reduction on average, then it's just a dumb thing to say.
Ultimately your programs all want to have some readily-available bytes in RAM, and most of them don't just cycle out constantly. 8GB is a hard upper bounds on multitasking, and while it might not be our grandpa's 8GB, I really have a hard time believing that it's comparable to 16GB. All this is is beside the point anyway: I switched to desktop like 5 years ago so I could affordably have 64GB and I could never go back. Turns out I don't actually want to take my work home with me, too.
Fiat currencies are an almost perfect exploitation of humanities fatal flaws (greed, unwillingness to acknowledge externalities - i.e. selfishness).
Fractional reserve lending are an almost perfect exploitation of humanities fatal flaws (greed, unwillingness to acknowledge externalities - i.e. selfishness).
Deflationary currency is useless currency. There is a reason that every deflationary period in modern monetary history was immediately followed by a catastrophic depression.
Contrary to the dollar-sign-eyed bitcoin hacks, the purpose of money is to be exchanged for goods and services, not to sit in an account forever while you watch numbers go up.
As a person holding a certain amount of currency, the last thing you want is the govt to print more. That is essentially the govt putting a hand in your pocket and taking away cash by diluting what you already have.
Is land a bad thing to buy because they are not making more of it?
I'm sure you know you can exchange those numbers for other numbers that show up in your bank if you're inclined..
As a person who makes goods/provides services, what you want is for the government to ensure there is enough money for others to buy/hire your good/service.
As a person who wants to buy a house but doesn't have the full purchase price in liquid dollars, the thing you want is for the government to give lenders access to low-cost money so they can then lend it to you at low rates so you can afford the principal+interest on your loan.
As a person with savings to invest, you want to know that the bonds you're buying will be paid back with some interest to balance the risk of higher-yield stocks/bonds.
Sure, you have a valid point. However, a tangential argument can be made that, exactly due to banks lending money to buy houses, houses have essentially been priced out for regular people..
If you see educational costs, at one point in the 70s I think, the govt decided to offer loans so that students wouldn't need to do a job on the side to fund their education. Now it's ballooned to become such a mess..
They have absolutely not, with the noted exception of a few popular urban areas which house a relatively small minority of the population, been priced out for regular people.
The home ownership rate in the United States is 65.8%. San Francisco. Is. Not. Normal.
The answers for Canada's public health care system differ slightly but aside from the potential monetary issues for people without adequate insurance in the US, the Canadian system depends on capacity if you aren't a) a critical care patient b) high profile i.e. athelete, politician etc
1. Almost impossible to shop around
2. Instead this is a Dr's or a public system policy choice.
3. Dr's incentive is to minimize costs
4. Your ability to aquire healthcare is based on limited availability and your condition. If you are critical you will get immediate care, if you need a MRI - perhaps 6 months, if you need a specialist i.e. liver doc, sleep study, orthopedic surgeon etc, 1+ year
5. You have very little choice. Finding a family doc is very constrained
OBVIOUSLY, this depends on the province as health care is a provincial domain.
Not sure why people insist on posting comments like those identified. If you were publicly identified as making those comments, you would definitely be at risk of losing friends/jobs etc.
But that said, Parler isn't alone in their issue with inappropriate comments.
The benefit of low carb is the reduction in your body's production of Insulin.
Insulin resistance after decades of high carb diets, regardless of the # of calories consumed, is the source of all metabolic disease.
Low carb is going to reverse this, a simple reduction in calories won't.
The low carb diet also has access to your entirety of fat stores.
Insulin resistance will result in a huge amount of insulin in your blood stream. Insulin prevents fat from being removed from your fat storage so a reduction in calories, while it does show a short term (i.e.6 week) reduction in body weight, it also reduces your BMR which is why people regain the weight lost.
Once the alpha cells in your pancrease are insulin resistant, they will be producing glucagon causing elevated blood sugar compounding the problem.
tl/dr; - Insulin resistance is the source of all metabolic disease. Reduce it via a low carb/fasting lifestyle.
I wouldn't say that they are uninformed, just that they are informed by the literature. And unfortunately the literature surrounding diet is awash with special interest groups, small sample sizes and dodgy statistics. While clinical trials involving pharmaceuticals are often more rigorous. It's near impossible to do randomised double blind controls for diet, and energy levels and feeling great aren't as easy to measure empirically
Of course “diets” don’t work. People consider diets as something you get on for some results or changes and then abandon them or give up later. So what actually works is making it a lifestyle change, which isn’t easy either, but is at least honest in what it means to people when they hear the word. Lifestyle changes are hard. Diets are what people usually see celebrities doing before an awards ceremony.
https://www.tiktok.com/@alphaaaroxy_teammoto/video/716155578...
The Diagolon that the House of Commons said was a "violent extremist organisation." but has never committed a crime ?
The same Diagolon that the RCMP determined: "DIAGOLON does not pose a criminal or national security threat." - Royal Canadian Mounted Police https://finance.yahoo.com/news/documents-reveal-shocking-rcm...
Diagolon is a meme and you don't get it, which is ok but stop spreading misinformation.