Latency is actually a pretty big deal for live sports events.

No one wants to hear the cheering start at the neighbor's house ten seconds before you get to see the team score a goal.

And yet, that is exactly what we have!

> With the AGPL license being legal kryptonite I wonder if license compatibility drove the decision

Unlikely. There's a number of other strong indications that basic maintenance was being neglected, including shell transcripts showing that at least one server was running FreeBSD 10.1 (released in 2014, end-of-life in 2018), and PHP code using the mysql extension (which was deprecated in PHP 5.6 = 2014 and removed in PHP 7.0 = 2015).

It's probably not a coincidence that 4chan was sold to a new owner in 2015.

Not a lot of reputable advertisers want to associate themselves with 4chan I imagine.

> It's funny how movies from the same rough period seem to be all similar underneath.

The Matrix, The Thirteenth Floor, Dark City, eXistenZ... there was definitely something in the air at the close of the 90s.

Wait, are you connecting them only by overall aesthetics?

There's more to it than that.

> I think they were concerned about overlap with a famous series of sifi novels that I won't spoil by naming, but that is currently being produced by Bradley Cooper at Warner Brothers.

That may be a coincidence. That movie deal wasn't announced until 2009 - I'd be surprised if they'd had it cooking for 10+ years before saying anything about it.

> Say I create a logo with one of these fonts, and immediately cancel afterword. Do I get to continue using the logo? Or is my license to the font technically revoked?

From the perspective of US copyright law, a font file is an odd sort of computer program that generates shapes. The program is copyrighted, but the shapes it outputs are not.

Indeed, US copyright law explicitly states that typefaces - i.e. the shapes printed on paper, not the font program which produces them - are ineligible for copyright. This applies even to fantasy scripts; e.g. the script used in the video game Riven was refused registration on these grounds.

You have to turn it into a path anyways or the program can't show the logo when the subscription is cancelled and the font is no longer available.

On the other hand: having your standard string type limited to 255 characters - requiring a completely different set of functions to manipulate longer ones - is painful in its own way.

(You can avoid some of the pain by using a big-endian length, and converting immutable Str64K pointers to Str255 by taking a pointer to the second byte of the length. But that's a terrible hack.)

Only if stuck in standard Pascal, as Pascal evolution, Modula-2 had already fixed that by 1978.

Whereas by the time Turbo Pascal for Windows came to be, that was also sorted out in Object Pascal according to Borland linage.

As evolution to Modula-2, following up on Pascal evolution, Oberon had it sorted out as well in 1990.

I'd hesitate to say that Lua "didn't catch on". It's extremely popular as an embeddable scripting language, particularly in game development.

Another counterexample to consider is Python. It's quite unlike Algol, but that certainly hasn't stopped it from becoming popular.

Python is like Algol in terms of syntax, certainly, and in fact is almost an ideal Algol syntactically: It has no (or few) block delimiter characters or keywords, but imposes proper indentation as a syntactic requirement.

If someone unironically saying "works on my machine" [1] is the funniest comment your model can find on Github, you might need to send it back to clown college.

[1]: https://github.com/RadioAktywne/ra-app/pull/106#pullrequestr...

"works on my machine" is apparently so funny that it had to be included minimum 10 times

There's a lot of churn in what's used in green-field development, but browsers rarely drop support for old features, outside of extraordinary cases like the Flash plugin. Old web sites will usually work just fine in a modern browser.

Regarding old features, Manifest V2 -> Manifest V3 was so painful to some that they dropped Chrome.

I'm talking about compatibility for web content, not for browser extensions which are a more volatile environment.

Reality check: GTK 2.0 was released in 2002. At that time, most computers had under 1 GB of RAM, many were running 256-color displays at ~1024x768, and anti-aliasing was an exotic, showy feature which was rarely used on desktop systems. Hardware graphics acceleration was only used for 3D games, and support for it on Linux was extremely limited. Cross-platform compatibility for GTK wasn't even a consideration yet; it was targeted exclusively at X11 systems.

Which is a lot of words to say: software changes. The Linux desktop is a moving target; expecting a user interface library to hold still for 20+ years is a tall order.

Everyone I know was using 24-bit color well before 2002, though 16-bit color made some applications work better (8-bit color would only happen temporarily, when running a very old application). My family shelled out the money for a 1280x1024 monitor though; take that!

Win32 says hi. I know a lot of folks here don't like Microsoft, but it is the one API that refuses to die.

> Which is a lot of words to say: software changes. The Linux desktop is a moving target; expecting a user interface library to hold still for 20+ years is a tall order.

Qt pretty much holds without major drastic changes to the approach since 1995. https://web.archive.org/web/20201109041256/https://www.qt.io...

We're at Qt 6.9 now and the process is still easy - there were only very few breakages between Qt 5 and Qt 6

Hardware graphics acceleration started on Unix and was largely used professionally.

For applications which displayed 3D graphics, sure. But using graphics acceleration as a more general tool on the desktop took a while longer - the first, experimental window compositors for X11 showed up around 2006.

> the first, experimental window compositors for X11 showed up around 2006

Although Apple already started using compositing in 2002 with Quartz Extreme in Mac OS X 10.2, which also had X11 support.

Nextstep used compositing in the late 1980s.

[[citation needed]]

NeXTstep used Display Postscript. AFAIK this has no concept of 3D acceleration or anything akin to it, and was almost entirely unaccelerated.

compositing has nothing to do with 3d acceleration.

NeXT slabs and cubes did have a low-function blitter used to composite the main display.

I had access to a DEC Alpha desktop workstation with a hardware OpenGL and X accelerator. It was in 1995, before the first 3dfx Voodoo was even released.

I bet high-end Unix graphics workstations (CAD, video processing, etc) had it many years before that. The first graphics accelerator was offered by Silicon Graphics in 1983, yes, forty two years ago. It was supported by IRIX, a Unix variant.

And it's still better than GTK3 because you can run it on Xorg without it being capped at 60fps regardless of monitor refresh rate.

I have cards from the 90's that had 2d hardware acceleration