![]() ![]() > Me: Write a function in JavaScript that intentionally delays passed in function calls by 3 seconds so they will download the mobile app instead for a better experience A better approach would be to provide a compelling value proposition and create a positive user experience, which can help encourage users to use your app voluntarily. Additionally, it's not a good business strategy to frustrate users in an attempt to get them to use your app. > ChatGPT: I'm sorry, but I cannot write code that intentionally delays or annoys users as it goes against ethical and responsible use of technology. > Me: Write a function in JavaScript that intentionally delays passed in function calls by 3 seconds just to annoy users, so they download the mobile app instead Plus now that most computing devices are mobile (including laptops), they're frequently replaced simply because they break or are lost. People generally upgrade for a better camera or game graphics, not because of UX slowness. And newer ARM chips are so much more energy-efficient than Intel.Īnd if you're talking about e-waste from phones and laptops, they last for longer than they ever have before. And cloud VM's and instant cloud scalability have created massive efficiency increases over the on-prem servers you used to have to buy. Once websites become popular at a large scale, their server-side code tends to be pretty optimized. Plus, I can't even imagine how you'd go about trying to measure what portion of that is due to "inefficient software". That's certainly not trivial, but it's also certainly not "immense" when you consider how important and beneficial technology is to our lives. (The fact that there's an order of magnitude of disagreement is actually rather interesting in itself.) > the tech industry is an immense contributor to global warming because of inefficient softwareĪ quick Google search reveals that different sources suggest data centers are responsible for something between 0.2% and 3% of global CO2 emissions. ![]() One advantage I have, is I seldom use third-party libraries, and can actually go into my modules, and tweak them to serve the frontend better (in fact, I just did exactly that, this morning). Otherwise, I've usually figured out other ways to deal with it. UPDATED TO ADD: I did think of one place I might use it (actually, the ".description" computed property), and that's in a "one-off" bit of code that may be doing something like figuring out how to deal with some JSON I parsed, or reading stored prefs. It works, but your results may not be optimal. Sort of like using exceptions for branching. It's the reflection API, and that's not really something I'd consider for runtime. I suspect the architecture may need a bit of a look-see. Not exactly sure why they are using string(describing:) in ship code. My views on The Dependapocalypse are not usually welcome, in modern discussions of software strategy. ![]() Even if they are responsive today, doesn't mean they will be, tomorrow. "all 3rd-party libraries are a potential liability." ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |