I love dark mode... when it's dark! When my colleagues are using dark mode in a sunny and well-lit room, I'm thinking guys do you just really love squinting?
Judging by what I see at work, where people seem to use dark mode during daytime in teams, outlook and others, which isn’t the default AFAIK, I’d say quite a fair bit.
Someone has to develop and maintain it. It's difficult to quantify the development/datacenter efforts with respect to end user displays. I do doubt dark mode comes ahead at all at any rate. Morealso, OLED displays are overall ill-suited for regular work due to burn-in -- those are the only ones that 'can' save energy (unless you count CRT - but they would be way worse to begin with). The cost of the shorter lifespan OLED (burn-in) would heavily outweight the energy saved - you are looking at 15-20Wh top.
Note: displays with backlight (the extreme vast majority) display blacks by blocking the light, so the dark mode alone doesn't save anything. There are ones with local dimming that can partially benefit.
Local dimming is becoming more popular, OLED is improving, and MiniLED or whatever they call it will be viable one day.
Maybe you're right about that not offsetting whatever server costs though. I don't think "develop and maintain" affects the environment, but maybe OP was including human resources.
Offtopic, but I really like the UI/UX of these games. Very intuitive building. Would be cool to see some of these concepts get into Unreal Editor. They already have some when it comes to landscaping.
4 years college taking some of the toughest courses there are to be ready for 4 years of medical school. After that 8 years of schooling then you have to go through the hazing ritual they call "residency". Residency varies depending on your specialty, from 3 to 7 more years[1] - during which time you're working 60-80 hour weeks [2].
So baseline if you're smart and hard working, you need to take the hardest college track from ages 18-22, medical school (22-26). Then work two jobs worth of hours as a trainee making well under 100k starting at age 27 and into your early 30s [3] so you can't save or pay down any of your debt from getting here.
So if you choose to be a doctor, you have to:
(a) dedicate to working your ass off at 18,
(b) keep at it until you're in your early 30s,
(c) start with massive debt
I think it's actually pretty amazing that we have as many doctors as we do.
But what's the actual rate limiting factor? I remember liking at University entrance requirements in my country and the minimum requirements were low compared to what you actually needed because of the insane competition.
Why not just expand the amount of spots and train more doctors? Surely they don't take everyone that applies and then filter them out (even CS doesn't do that).
The limiting factor, as I understand it, is residency slots. Residency slots are, for some reason, principally funded by Medicare, so they are funded by Congress, which has for the past several decades not increased that allocation. Apparently that's starting to change?
In my opinion though, I can't see why the number of doctors should be something that is principally controlled by congress at all, and ideally some other method should come about.
Until that happens though, it's up to Congress to fix this.
I've read about it and came upon the same answer as you just gave, but I'm not satisfied with it.
Looking around the world, it seems to me that most developed countries (if not all) suffer from the same problem of lack of doctors. Some mask it by pulling doctors from poorer countries (including poorer developed countries), but it seems like there's a lack of doctors everywhere. If that's the case then Congress can't really be the only limiting factor.
Why are there no developed countries that have far too many doctors? The only countries that I can think of that export doctors are Cuba and third world countries.
You need to be smart, hard working, dedicated, and interested in medicine. That’s going to be a limiting factor. Add in high tuition and a public that hates you, and it’s hard to motivate.
Becoming a medical professional is very expensive; tuition often going into the six-figures. Becoming a physician takes a good decade or more of your life. The entry process is very competitive and limited, with majority of applicants being rejected. IIRC the acceptance rates are below 50%. Once a person clears those hurdles however, they are now faced with a torrential abuse of corruption, racism, fraud, elitism, favoritism, etc. that they must overcome.
Much of the medical field is like this unfortunately, it's not just doctors. Take for example this article about Duke's Nursing School and racism: https://archive.is/DIJ98. From what I've heard through third-party, corruption at Duke is at an all-time high. This is just the stuff we hear about too, so I'm sure these problems affect all of the top-tier colleges that nobody reports so they don't get ejected from these programs.
Complete destruction of price signals due to the symbiotic relationship between "providers" and "insurance" cooperating to defraud patients. This is backed up by whatever corrupt laws allow "providers" to send arbitrary post-facto bills and even presumably enforce such nonsense "debts", rather than getting prosecuted for said fraud.
Unfortunately most people taking notice of how broken the system is end up get fixated on the large figures on those fraudulent bills, and think single payer can do something to fix at least part of the system. But systematically, at best single payer would be tying the garbage bag off for tidy disposal, when what we actually need is for the sheer majority of medical care to have a functioning market that allows for patient agency.
This is good. Because it now will make way more sense to compete with Google on searching the internet, since they screwed it up. They’re are panicking and defending their bottom-line instead of innovating and leading. I think internet search is now ripe for disruption. Still need deep pockets but it’s now increasingly easier to be much better at search than Google.
> Still need deep pockets but it’s now increasingly easier to be much better at search than Google.
That's the big problem here. All the new search engines rely on the infrastructure of the old ones. It would take very little collusion between Google and Microsoft to crush something like Kagi. And the moment any new competitor gets big, they'll do it.
What's needed is an anti-trust breakup. There's simply too big a conflict of interest between Google, the search engine product, and Google, the ad-tech giant earning money off the websites.
Google is using their search engine monopoly to control the wider web, and fill it with spammy SEO garbage to juice their advertising revenues.
Any new entrant sort-of has to prove itself also as crawling sites can be hard, e.g. Cloudflare which fronts an appreciable portion of the web. Also large sites like Reddit you need to crawl them at 100s of pages a second to keep up to date with content, not something they're generally going to appreciate without a recognisable benefit to them.
> Any new entrant sort-of has to prove itself also as crawling sites can be hard
It's very hard, getting harder as websites grow more hostile to crawlers. (With more and more putting up login walls to keep poorly written AI crawlers out.)
But the real problem is that tech is culturally unused to dealing with monopolists "on even ground". The wider tech community operates on the implied worldview that they can take on anyone by just asking daddy A16Z for a duovigintillion dollars. For 25 nearly-continuous years, you could just outspend to get into even the most hostile markets.
That economic climate is just ... gone now. No more free money. You can't just buy your way to the top anymore, the business has to financially work.
And most importantly: You can't outspend the incumbents anymore, but they still can outspend you.
Kagi relies on data from the search engine giants. Without that data, it's dead in the water.
That's the dumbest part of it all; Kagi's not an entirely new search engine. It's Google's index but without the ad-tech juicing, and some clever use of a few other search indices to specialize results.
(I.e. Google could unshit itself at any moment, it just doesn't want to.)
The problem being the aforementioned conflict of interest. The moment you're a competitor to Google Search (or any of Google's other products), they can kill your API access and ruin you.
I fear that Kagi is going to suffer the same fate as Neeva did:
"In a way, the brief flicker of Neeva’s existence tells everything you need to know about the last 20 years of search-engine supremacy. Building a search engine is hard. Building one better than Google is even harder. But if you want to beat Google, a better search engine is only the very beginning. And it only gets harder from there." [1]
Not to mention Kagi's continued sustainability issues (28,071 users at the time of writing) [2] and their plans for their own AI products [3] [4] that would inevitably and eventually doom them.
Also, ADeerAppeared is right that government intervention aka a major breakup needs to happen for competition to thrive and I don't see it happening (although I hope I'm wrong).
I do like the competition starting to happen again. A lot of the articles seem to concentrate on how Google should do better. But there are so many sites that any change they do will break someone random. With best possible checks, it's just not realistic that there will be no mistakes.
We'd be better with 5 players doing things slightly differently. Nobody would get completely wiped by a single change.
