If we'd really want to lower the energy usage of our applications we probably have to simplify along the whole chain. Using Astro means the whole process relies probably on NPM, the build cycle is probably also more energy intensive. Static HTML hosted on some dirt cheap server is probably more environmentally friendly than hooking up to some API and giving us various experiences based upon the mix of the grid.
To me the savings as mentioned in the article feel rather superficial compared to the energy consumed just getting the basic infra for this up & running. Somehow this feels like greenwashing.
All addressed in TFA. The author writes multiple times that this is experimental, would be a drop in the bucket, and brings its own power cost to implement - and that GAW is in no way intended to directly "fix" web power consumption.
As you've laid your judgement of your woodwork on all woodwork, and thus have concluded that all woodwork is less intelligible than all software building. I know this is an interpretation, and not verbatim. But it might be sensible to be a little bit less strongly opinionated on the levels of work being intelligible, as its just an opinion, and would not consider it a fact.
The work I do on software I consider as relatively intelligible, but the woodwork I do, requires as much of my brain as the programming, just in a whole other area of my brain.
Your harsh judgement on the matter is just rather irrelevant, it works for him, it tickles his brain, and was just an honest response on github, no need to get trolled here on HN.
I would not call it insanely expensive, if you compare a Bosch Glide miter saw with the kapex, yes there is a difference, but it's not insane. The same goes for other festool tools like their sanders, compare them to Rupes, Flex or any other high quality brand and the differences are marginal.
The Festool dust extractors are similar to what you describe. I got one for list price, a bit over $700. It's quiet, has an accessory outlet that can turn the vac on, has an option for a remote, has big wheels so it doesn't get hung up when you pull it around. Etc.
The Festool is noticeably more than even the very good competitors - I think the Bosch is about $150 less, and there are others that are a bit more than the Festool.
But it's not like there's a $200 shop vac that's almost as good. There are such shop vacs -- but they're a different product entirely.
If you don't care about it being square, durable and trustworthy, than something like TACKLIFE might work, but for a miter saw I would pick something just a bit more expensive, or buy something second hand.
I've owned a cheap one, it failed, bought a festool one, its still square, doesn't fail and the cut quality is great. You don't need to buy a Kapex (the festool miter saw), but something like the bosch, milwaukee, dewalt or makita will survive way longer.
I've bought too many cheap tools to do that ever again.
It amazes me how in America the cabinet style table saw is still favoured above the European Slider. I own a European slider, and it allows me to have my hands further away from the blade, it allows for easier support of the workpiece...
In my opinion it's just way safer, especially if you keep the safety guard in tact.
The other culture difference I've noticed with American furniture makers is that they use the table saw for many more operations than we europeans do. For making rabbets, we generally use a shaper. Shapers can be daunting machines, but used with the safety equipment they come with they can be a blessing to work with. Things like kickback if you try to create a rabbet are prevented.
It just feels strange to see that difference between these two continents, maybe OSHA is just way more lenient, or the idea of the importance of employee safety is something totally different..
Fairphone might be interesting, but it does not solve the problem of blobs, the open source part must come from the chipset providers and they are not that willing.
Once Rails 5.1 comes out and we upgrade to it we'll probably switch to Webpacker. It was an awesome development in the Rails ecosystem and really verified our investment into Webpack.
It is a website for his own wedding offering a chance to learn something. I don't understand why there is a need to be pedantic about things like the JavaScript only in this context. It is a reoccurring thing on HN and it doesn't invite us to have a good discussion about the dependency to JS. There is also no need to compare it to yourself. It just comes off very self centered. I understand that in many cases you might not need a certain technology but if there is a fun opportunity to learn a certain thing and using it has little to no harm, why not?
To me the savings as mentioned in the article feel rather superficial compared to the energy consumed just getting the basic infra for this up & running. Somehow this feels like greenwashing.