The theoretical maximum efficiency for solar panels is ~33% total energy conversion. So I assume what they mean here is that they achieved 130% of 33% =~43% total energy conversion, which doesn't break any laws of physics.
That said, I read the article and it's very unclear. They talk about 130% quantum efficiency but I have no idea what that might mean.
I've been building out a fairly complex app. I decided to avoid Next.js some I went with a simple Hono + Tanstack Router/query. With Vite 8, my build time is about ~0.8s.
I've also go a much simpler Next.js app with a build time of 45s.
That stack is such a breath of fresh air. And so easy to deploy anywhere.
I do love the idea of a batteries included framework for the JS ecosystem, like the mythical Rails for node, but as long as we're gluing random stuff together... This is a really nice combo. I also love using Hono and React/Vite with TRPC.
I stopped working with Next a few years ago, so I can't comment very fairly on recent changes in the framework. However, it does appear as though it has become even more complex, and that was a significant art of what steered me away. The other part was simply a lack of cohesion with design decisions and direction. The middleware layer seemed like a poor design. Various opinions around things like default cache policies felt incorrect. I found myself battling their decisions too often, for too little benefit.
> notes/ — Narrative. What happened each session — decisions, actions, open items. Append-only. Never modified after the day ends
I already have to fight the agent constantly to prevent it adding backwards compatibility, workarounds, wrappers etc. for things that I changed or removed. If there's even one forgotten comment that references the old way, it'll write a whole converter system if I walk out of the room for 5 minutes, just in case we ever need it, and even though my agents file specifically says not to (YAGNI, all backwards compatibility must be cleared by me, no wrappers without my explicit approval, etc.). Having a log of the things we tried last month but which failed and got discarded sounds like a bad idea, unless it's specifically curated to say "list of things that failed: ...", which by definition, an append only log can't do.
I have hit the situation where it discovered removed systems through git history, even. At least that's rare though.
Yeah I'm not sure how the author came to the conclusion using the meta description and JSON-LD are so important. It reminds me modern day keyword stuffing. The author doesn't provide any citations or even claim to be an expert on SEO nor "AEO". It's fine to have some theories on things on the internet. But why is this being upvoted?
Scientifically it's valid, and good scientists and doctors would immediately pick up on the nuance.
The issue is shameless "science" reporting like this which packages up the results for non experts, without explaining the nuance because they know the sensational headlines will get more attention, and they know non-expert readers will get scared and share the article on places like HN or Facebook.
It's such an obvious play: find one doctor who'll make a loaded statement with the word "whiplash", write on this one study as if it's gospel truth, get everyone reading it as scared as possible. Throw in links to other emotional articles like "Can you die of a broken heart?" throughout the text to trigger secondary emotional reactions that will get confused with the main ones. Boom, social media sharing heaven, who cares if the science was valid or not?
And to be clear, the science underneath might be valid, probably even is, but it would need the expertise of someone who understands statistics and medicine to decide whether you should take action based on this or not.
I would love tabs for Spotify. I just discovered I can at least open new windows from the linux YouTube music client by middle clicking, a revelation !
Every application (or concept) can introduce “tabs”, but it means something wildly different for that particular application. Tabs (or instances) in an application immediately bumps into the concept of state (statefull vs stateless) in applications.
Sometimes, it makes perfect sense. The reason tabs made sense for web browsers since 2004 is because each web page could be thought of as a “stateless” instance of an application. You’re not asking for “tabs”, you wish every application could be “Stateless”. Stateless is a beautiful thing, until you understand what state is, and who needs to manage it.
If every “tab” of Spotify had no idea what the other “tab” is playing and you had to switch back and forth between tabs to pause-and-play songs, that would be a bug, not a feature. While 2 “windows” playing audio (if you instruct them to) is expected.
I've personally stopped visiting Ars because of these type of articles. This one isn't too bad but a few days I went there for tech news, and was presented with a "woman sneezes out maggots" or something like that, with photos. And decided I'm done. If I wanted medical shock articles, I'd go looking for them. Which will be never, and I don't appreciate having them interwoven with tech news on a tech blog.
It might well be a mixture, but 95% of that mixture is vendor lock in. Same reason they don't support AGENTS.md, they want to add friction in switching.
That said, I read the article and it's very unclear. They talk about 130% quantum efficiency but I have no idea what that might mean.
reply