Make it illegal for calls originating from international origins to lack caller identification. Also likely unenforceable, but again, it sets the basis.
Since I sense that caller ID is completely spoofable for calls from international networks, now add some technical salt: Require domestic phone companies at the edges to add some kind of "network of origin" prefix to caller IDs from international origins. This is prepended to what is provided by the outside network, even if they provided "no caller ID" or "unknown caller".
Make it that domestic calls don't have this prefix and it is illegal to insert anything that resembles one.
This way I can see incoming calls from network Xyzabc for the junk they are. And networks will each get a reputation from consumers.
Racist people like you make peaceful protests and working for change against racism so much harder. You're just out for revenge and your rhetoric shows it.
Edit: I've had just about enough of people using "white privilege" to justify violence and blatant discrimination because "they haven't been exposed to enough". Its just another way to justify racism. Plenty of white people live in poverty. Its not ok in either direction.
Lets face it, localstorage is just cookies with extra space for more chips. Controls around cookies need to apply to localstorage as well.
I'd really like to be able to edit cookie lifetimes on a site-by-site basis. Overlap where cookies are reused by multiple sites. Plenty of cookies should be discarded a minute after last use. Others should stay around because they're useful.
Well we have multiple IP coffee/tea/choc machines and they definitely return 418 codes. Sounds like IANA need to sort out their backwardness and fix things by grandfathering it in for clarity.
If your test involves two different GUI systems running the same 'specialised libraries', you are running the specialised libraries, not the GUI systems.
A media player involves heavy crunching and streaming and memory I/o, and access to the GPU if possible - these things that game engines excel at.
Most GOOD game engines are in fact an entire operating system, abstracting away the host operating system, and attempting to depend on it very minimally - giving coders an environment which does not have to conform to "business user" semantics.
This doesn't mean game engines don't burn through energy. But on mobile, at least, most of the good game engines do allow you to fine-tune your frame-rate such that, indeed, you don't need to update anything - video or stream - at all unless some event happens..
It would be an interesting test - but beware that there are multiple approaches, and even plain ol' definitions, for how a 'game engine' differentiates from an 'operating system'.
The two systems of thought have been intertwined, commercially, for decades...
A simple A/B test of the sort I described is fairly common. Especially when we are considering alternatives and want to isolate one variable, eg the GUI. Eg if someone was interested in godot and qt was the usual then I'd encourage that team member to use the same media libraries is a given to keep it fair. This is basic science methodology: change one thing at a time to enable comparison.
You'd be amazed how much overhead a change can introduce even if the real work is done by a dedicated library. This is the whole point I was making.
eg A library like imgui that repeatedly redraws itself isn't actually that wasteful power wise if you tune it and make it fit for purpose. We've done exactly that for mobile. The simplicity of its approach enables all sorts of optimisations. Imgui is a straightforward animal that can be optimised in all sorts of directions, that is actually one of its drawcards. Reorientating it to output text has already been done - thats how flexible it can get.
So to update and add to their old slogan: Think different... but we still keep our 30% cut
Tech in general has quite a few things about itself it needs to fix. Is it ethical for Apple to write the OS, run the store, sell its own wares AND compete with people it charges, eg 30%, to compete? Same question for other stores, eg Google? Both companies have analytics to determine which of the crop is successful and therefore needs to be harvested. Is this a level playing field? Do we expect such? Should we?
These aren't trivial or straightforward issues. It will be interesting to see over the next 20 years how this plays out. It would be better with a shorter time frame but... nothing involving legalities is usually fast.
Charging 30% to competitors that it doesn’t charge to itself isn’t really a problem because of opportunity cost. If an Apple product takes revenue from a competitor that’s paying them 30% then they still have all the costs of running their competing service and make less money from their 30% cut. The margins have to be really good for such a thing to be worthwhile.
I'm still using my old note app I wrote years ago back in 2003 and keep porting to every gadget I use. Its amusing to use such an old ppc app under Windows 10.
Sorry to hijack this thread, but too curious if you made any headway from your "Non-cloud voice recognition for home use?" post? Sounded like an interesting use-case.
All "episodes of Galaxy Quest are true historical documentaries".
Classic.