Yes, but more in a QoL way. I say negative as in - if you don't have it you lose a customer, rather than if you have it, you gain a customer.
If performance is a feature, then it's not an important feature. Otherwise, people would use Paint, for everything.
Or put it another way, you want to do X1 task. It's editing a picture to remove some blemishes from skin. You could use a console, to edit individuals pixels, but it would take months/year to finish the task if you are making changes blindly, then checking. It could take several days if you are doing it with Paint. Or you could do it with Photoshop in a few minutes. What difference does a few ms make if you lose hours?
Now this is only task X1 which is edit blemishes, now you do this for every conceivable task and do an average. What percent of that task are ms loses?
> if you don't have it you lose a customer, rather than if you have it, you gain a customer
I completely agree with that take. That's exactly the reason why, for example, whenever I'm about to do some "Real Work" with my computer (read: heavyweight stuff), all Electron apps are the first to go away.
My work uses Slack for communications, and it is fine sitting there for the most part, but I close it when doing some demanding tasks because it takes an unreasonable amount of resources for what it is, a glorified chat client.
Cool, the biggest issue for me when I was trying to do the same thing (turn my beefy PC to a "gaming console") was the ability to turn it on with gamepad. I've spent a lot of time researching it and have not found a reliable solution.
As a workaround, with a USB remote controller[0] you can put a PC to sleep and wake it up by pressing the power button. That's what I did with my setup of a mac for game streaming[1]. In my experience, the sleep/wake functionality works on Windows and Linux as well, so it should work on this.
Also when you say: don't trust Telegram, while not saying anything about WhatsApp, you are, on average, pushing people from a solution that isn't proven to be trustworthy to a solution that is proven to be untrustworthy.
Because unless you simultaneously point out that WhatsApp is worse, that is where people will go if they listen to you and avoid Telegram.
I think in this context, WhatsApp is better than Telegram. In Telegram, you'd upload your files in a way that the server can see them. In WhatsApp, the server won't be able to see the contents.
(Even in general, I think that Telegram is no clear win over WhatsApp, and in fact I'd consider it worse in terms of chat message security.)
WhatsApp has a documented history of all kinds of shadyness from uploading unencrypted (yes, unencrypted) backups to Google under an agreement that let Google rummage through them(!) to their "send the data in a sidechannel directly to Facebook for analysis while also sending it end-to-end-encrypted to the recipient".
I really can't understand why you bright folks here on HN falls for WhatsApps marketing.
E2E means absolutely nothing as long as the messages are siphoned away in broad daylight.
That said: avoid Telegram all you want. But if you mean no one should ever touch it, I hope you are also against physical mail which is way less secure and also email which is way less secure than Telegram.
> WhatsApp has a documented history of all kinds of shadyness from uploading unencrypted (yes, unencrypted) backups to Google under an agreement that let Google rummage through them(!) to their "send the data in a sidechannel directly to Facebook for analysis while also sending it end-to-end-encrypted to the recipient".
I don't have that backup enabled. Does that mean that WhatsApp is secure for me with everyone who also has that disabled?
I don't see how Telegram is better in that respect; the server sees all messages directly. It doesn't even need a documented backdoor like you described.
> under an agreement that let Google rummage through them(!) to their "send the data in a sidechannel directly to Facebook for analysis while also sending it end-to-end-encrypted to the recipient".
*EDIT*: Can you give a link to that agreement? It'd interest me. :)
Hi again. Yes, I agree you should ask me, it wasn't as easy to find as I first thought, but here[1] is a thread on HN that discusses it and a bit down the thread you find a link to the Verge [2] which in turn links to the case papers [3].
I admit the links I found now are less clear than I though and I don't have more time now, but there is clearly reason to be suspicious when 1.) Facebook stops encrypting data before upload 2.) Google accept to keep the data without counting it against the users quota 3.) sources claim there was a deal. None of these three carries too much weight on their own but together they paint a picture that something is going on.
You seem like a sincere person so be sure to note that what I found now was less damning than what I thought I would find which suggests either it hasn't turned out so bad or they have covered it well up.
Telegram has a Secret Chat. It's on the 3 dots menu in the screen for a contact. Secret chats are available only on one device, they don't sync to the other devices of the user.
How about pets.txt? My cat contributes a lot to my wellbeing so it was a tremendous help while building a website, I am sure people would like to know it.
Right - I only noticed the "ideal" number of clicks after I had finished the puzzle. That kinda diminished the "relaxing" aspect and made me want to go back and start speedrunning.
Otherwise, neat lil game. I got a nice picture of a kitty cat. :)
