Sven Slootweg (soft-deprecated) @joepie91@pixie.town

@sterophonick Reminds me of the Landlord Special smoke detectors that got installed in this block, and the one at the neighbours which kept going off despite there being no smoke.

Of course these were the '10 year' things which did not have a removable battery, nor any (intended) way to shut them off...

Good thing I have a set of wire/sidecutters and tools for prying 🙃 Ended up disassembling the thing, cutting the internal wires, and declaring it "the landlord's problem now"

@jonah I do sometimes get the feeling that this is the intention of some projects... and that people are just looking for a way to confirm their prejudices.

More specifically, the 'red flag' to me is when a project is asking for an amount of donations that's so large, that it's obvious they haven't really tried to reduce operational costs, and instead went for the nearest most convenient or familiar option, usually one that's explicitly designed for corporate use. Think stuff like building everything around AWS.

Even if they don't *intend* to monetize things later (but it's likely that they're not very opposed to it, because it often signals a corporate background), with that kind of operational cost, they will eventually *have* to monetize things simply because the operational cost is not sustainable.

It kind of feels like the most reliable predictor for "does someone intend to eventually monetize this donation-based thing" is the amount and scale of donations that they are asking for, with an exception for projects with a very large scope

@admin Huh, odd, I feel like it used to be a list of just the city names without the account address. Perhaps I picked it off a different list?

@admin Two bits of feedback:

- It seems harder to navigate the list of cities now, there's a lot of spurious information in the city list that isn't the city name
- Not a new issue, but <<'s Hertogenbosch>> is being auto-capitalized incorrectly (see attached image)

@mitu @davidgerard All this is skating right past the most crucial question here: why would they remove this to begin with? That is a deliberate action, it doesn't just magically happen, so there is an intention of some sort behind it.

@starfire It is indeed closely tied to Chromium (or more specifically CEF), that part is correct, but you can just have one system-wide installation of Electron the same way you do for Node, and run `electron path/to/application` and that's it. This is also how Electron worked from the start, the whole 'bundle a runtime with your app' only came later in Electron's life.

@starfire What I really hate about this particular myth is that it basically only exists because of commercial incentives; it's cheaper for a company to ship the runtime with the app (and have a consistent environment) than to use a system installation of Electron (and have to support users in different environments).

The result is that, because corporations drive almost all software development nowadays, people have started to believe that it is a *requirement* to do this with Electron, because obviously the tools have started focusing on this approach as well because that's what companies want.

And so a bunch of misinformation spreads because "Tauri doesn't need this!" even though the moment Tauri were to gain widespread adoption (if at all), companies would immediately construct a very similar setup because they just fundamentally don't care about the cost to the user, only about their own support cost, and the tradeoffs would be the same there.

So now there's a bunch of misinformation and a lot of wasted resources and work being replicated between projects and unnecessary tech stack migrations and now everything is worse for everyone involved because a bunch of tech companies wanted to skimp on support cost.