erichdongubler

See this reply to a sibling of your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980044

Author here, a bit cringe to see your WIP project posted here.

I'm confused; are you referring to GP's link to `gimli`, or your own repo in the OP?

Thanks! Can't forget your help in the process.

We've got this index of apps we're aware of, if you'd like to peruse: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=webgpu-apps

A well-earned accolade! Thanks for helping Firefox make a WebGPU.

Member of Firefox's WebGPU team here. This is expected. Stable support for macOS is something we hope to ship soon! From the post:

Although Firefox 141 enables WebGPU only on Windows, we plan to ship WebGPU on Mac and Linux in the coming months, and finally on Android.

Member of Firefox's WebGPU team here. I'm curious what extensions you're referring to!

We're hoping to ship on Windows stable in the next couple of Firefox releases. Other platforms should follow in the following year. If you want, I'd encourage you to try out WebGPU on Nightly on Linux and see if you run into any issues!

The big advantage of Make is that it is probably already installed.

...unless you're on Windows, like me!

Went to comments here exactly for this. I was delighted to see one of my favorite authors front-and-center as an incidental detail of an otherwise unrelated tech. demo.

I think it's addressed in the article:

As you may know, we built a prototype for desktop PWAs a few years ago, and unfortunately user testing on our solution showed confusion and lack of perceived value. We didn’t release it because we didn’t have an approach that could meet the needs of power users without causing confusion among the broader user base.

You're informing people (i.e., me and my team) that are working on implementing a spec. from a single piece of the web platform that their piece of the platform (graphics programming) is useless for a specific use case (gaming) without a very different piece of functionality being implemented on the web platform. That's valid feedback, but also difficult to act on with it's current form and audience.

I think what lukan is trying to tell you is that if you're serious about your advice being taken, you will need to find a venue in which the right people in the web ecosystem can engage with it. Neither me nor my team are the right audience for that, unfortunately. I suggest you file an issue on Bugzilla, if you want to start there! I'm happy to assist in making that happen, if you want.

If you do actually follow up with the above, I think you need to answer first: What APIs already exist on the web platform, and why are they not sufficient? For example, the Gamepad API exists; were you aware of it before, and do you think it fulfills the stated use case? Why or why not?

I will also push back on these statements:

If people want it to be relevant to its primary use case, than low-latency HID interface callbacks are certainly required...

Leave the noted key features out, and the GPU API will remain vestigial. =3

...because it appears to ignore valid use cases that exist outside of gaming. My team doesn't just serve the gaming use case (though we sure hope it will), and calling the API we're working on "vestigial [without supporting gaming]" is disrespectful to both people who need those other use cases filled _and_ people like me who are trying to make them possible. It also implies a responsibility for the platform as a whole that we can't possibly shoulder ourselves; the amount of expertise required to make a platform across all major OSes for just _one_ of these web platform APIs can be huge, and WebGPU is, indeed, very large.

I haven't had time to dig into all of these demos, but the material looks _delightful_.

In case it's interesting to anyone, I did just go on a big bug-filing spree for Firefox. There are a handful of issues (that were already on the Firefox team's radar) to resolve before all of these playgrounds work as-is: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=webgpu-unleashe...

Hey, member of the Firefox WebGPU team here. The short summary is: it's not yet ready for general consumption, but we're hoping to do so on the order of months, not years! Many things already work, and we'd encourage you to try it out on Nightly.

There is a _lot_ of work to do still to make sure we comply with the spec. in a way that's acceptable to ship in a browser. We're 90% of the way there in terms of functionality, but the last 10% of fixing up spec. changes in the last few years + being significantly more resourced-constrained (we have 3 full-time folks, Chrome has/had an order of magnitude more humans working on WebGPU) means we've got our work cut out for us.

If you're interested if your use cases work already a consumer of WebGPU in JS on Firefox, you can:

- Follow the `Platform Graphics: WebGPU` component in Bugzilla ([0]).

- CC yourself on the `webgpu-v1`[0] bug and its dependent meta bugs (which aggregate yet more work). These get updated every so often to recognize the (ahem) ever-growing list of things we have to do in Firefox.

- Try things out in Nightly, and file issues to help us prioritize things!

[0] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?component=Graphics%...

[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=webgpu-v1

Doesn't Jetbrains implement their own language support? Does this even use the first-party Deno components being discussed in the OP?

This reminds me of Nushell's structured output for its `ls` command. Nice!

Funnily enough, Dan calls out the differences of opinion of the styling of his site starting at this paragraph:

Just as an aside, something I've found funny for a long time is that I get quite a bit of hate mail about the styling on this page (and a similar volume of appreciation mail). …

RE: profiles: pro tip: you can use `about:profiles`.

It seems strange, because it's not reality! Forensic tools like FTK and Autopsy have had a plug-in framework for these forever, speaking as a former contributor to the former. There's also Kaitai Struct.

I'm sure other communities have popped up that I haven't heard of, too. There's lots of interest in unifying forensic parsing under open work.

Hi there, member of the Firefox WebGPU team here! We don't consider WebGPU on FF "ready" yet, but you're welcome to follow along with our progress on Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=webgpu-v1

There is another project inspired by scrcpy (I think) called sndcpy but it's no longer maintained it seems, so I'm very glad to see these capabilities added to scrcpy.

From the blog post:

With the introduction of a new API to capture audio from an Android app in Android 10, I made a prototype called sndcpy. …

Not only was it work by the same author, it was one of _multiple_ pushes to make this work. Nice!

It seems like the blog post link[1] would be better than a GitHub release listing PRs?

[1] https://blog.rom1v.com/2023/03/scrcpy-2-0-with-audio/

This should be at least theoretically possible -- in Windows, for instance, device file paths are based on connection topology, including port address.

You're right that the end impact is the same for OP. I don't think GP is arguing that this should necessarily soften consequences. It's pretty important to know who is responsible for this outcome and what consequences can fix the situation, though!

I believe GP's intended direction was that there may be very different conversations there depending on whether this is (1) a platform potentially abusing its users vs. (2) a platform's _user(s)_ potentially abusing other users.

I currently use the Lynket browser (which can leverage Chrome Custom Tabs to present each Firefox tab as an Android app per tab) and shortcuts to web links to get most of the feel of a PWA. Would recommend it if you're interested. :)

It's a concise notation for a type of editing drawn from an old Unix program called `sed`, which is still around in Unix's descendants (i.e., Linux).

In this case, GP suggests that GGP replace "effect" with "association".

If they are resurrected, couldn’t they be baptized themselves?

Intellectual honesty here: I don't know the answer for certain. An interesting question! I don't see an obstacle to it, since baptism and resurrection are, I my understanding, independent events. More than happy to learn more myself to get you an answer, if you'll accept the raincheck. :)

...no records need to be recovered. ...

Records will still be necessary. Joseph Smith is very explicit in Doctrine and Covenants 128:6-9 about this, in that we interpret the power to "bind in heaven" as the power to present records of ordinances/rites like baptism that will be ratified by Christ as final. If there are no records of an ordinance like baptism having happened, then they'll need to be done again.

[0] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-test...

Will there be millions of temples built to accommodate? Or is a temple not necessary for Baptiam [sic]?

I'm not sure on this either! I think both will be necessary. Baptisms for self need not a temple, though proxy baptisms have recently only been authorized in temples. I can see a world where the temple requirement gets relaxed, since there's historical precedent. Raincheck also, if you're interested.

Do you also do proxy marriages?

We do indeed! There are four types of ordinances currently done in temples:

1. Proxy baptisms 2. Initiatories: washing and anointing as prep. for 3 (proxy and living) 3. Endowment (proxy and living) 4. Sealing (proxy and living); this encompasses marriages (sealing of a couple) and sealing between children and parents.

Church policies and administrative descriptions of these ordinances can be found at:

- General Handbook, ch. 27: living ordinances: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-han... - General Handbook, ch. 28: proxy ordinances: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-han...

Nitpick: Safe Rust [_does_][0] let you construct null pointers -- it's _dereferencing_ them that's not allowed in safe Rust.

[0] https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...

The idea salvation can only occur if you were lucky enough to have your genealogy recorded is far removed from mainstream Christianity.

As a practicing member of the religion in question, this phrasing misrepresents what we believe will happen if records are missing. I don't have a reference to material on hand (am on mobile), but our belief is that during the millennium after Christ's second coming, much work will be dedicated towards recovering records of individuals who were "lost", even by miraculous means if necessary. This is possible in part because such individuals themselves will have been resurrected.

I'm a very happy user of the free tier of Descript right now, and will definitely pay once my transcription limit is reached.

It seems like this particular product might do a better job of the automated editing specifically, but Descript has a ton of other features (speaker identification, transcription, real-time editing based on text edits, asset management, and uploads), and I definitely wouldn't trade them for marginally better auto-removal of noise and filler.

Does anybody who develops Cleanvoice have any commentary here?

Does this already use `target-cpu=native`? Not sure if that would be apples-to-apples with the Zig implementation (which is what's important here), but I'd be surprised if it didn't yield some interesting wins.