vasametropolis

You can’t

You can - the software would have to hook into a background check service. This can absolutely be done.

Profitable for who? The one hosting it foots the bill. If it was federated, all drivers could host their own instance like WordPress and a single app would connect to all instances and all drivers.

Agencies could start up to manage the tech for a negotiable fee if the drivers in the area didn’t want to bother with the tech.

Whether or not it could be profitable entirely depends on the hosting and delivery model. One guy could host the tech stack and charge maintenance fees and be in the green.

If you mean rich, then yeah, nobody would probably be rich. But you can build a small business as a hosting provider no problem, and the drivers would probably get a better deal. Uber employs so many people it requires they charge money. There’s a tipping point when the service provider becomes so large that their sheer operating expenses start to necessitate increased costs. Breaking up provides better value in that case.

Can you say “anti-trust”

He’s not wrong in this case, it’s doable. There are many startups building similar services with arguably fewer starting resources. You should run completely in the other direction, but it’s not impossible.

Credit products, especially virtual, are easier to create than ever thanks to companies that have built out that infrastructure. Chequing can be facilitated and held by a major bank under the hood in most cases.

It might not be his end game, but it’s definitely possible. Now, forgive me while I weep for anyone that uses it if they manage to deliver it.

Honestly just seems like a tee up so the government can “persuade” these people to kill themselves. It’s a bold strategy, Cotton.

Could be a dry run for when life gets so bad in the next few years that people just look for the exit.

Apparently, the Zuck fucks

The design is still horrendous. I was hoping for a total do over.

It has been predicted for years that the Internet would split and I’m all for it at this point.

This is the perspective that is totally forgotten and missed by most engaging in the discussion. Not to diminish Larian’s achievement, but they literally busted out the old playbook. Credit where it’s due, but BG3 shouldn’t be controversial - it should be the standard because that’s what the standard used to be.

It’s employee hostile so their job is almost impossible.

Every employee should hold the line - if they fire you all they’re fucked.

Ya, this guy is toast. He just told the world he thinks his product sucks - the sane know he’s wrong at least.

So they’re on suicide watch after Baldur’s Gate 3? Got it.

What’s the point of a union if you just get dropped anyway? The industry is an embarrassment.

The truth is that JS is currently “good enough” and all the best (adopted) web frameworks are either server or JS based.

I believe the chunking of script files is currently a bit more natural as well.

WebAssembly is the best choice for certain kinds of apps but most web apps are good enough with JS. If communities pour a lot of polish into WASM frameworks you may start to see wider adoption. Diversity is good, but it does need to be asked why WASM + DOM is objectively better than JS + DOM. It complicates the ecosystem a bit because you might fracture it for no good reason. Should there be Rust, Python, and JS DOM rendering frameworks? Is there a benefit?

If you have a more traditionally native app you want to port, that’s different. That’s a great fit for WASM. Personally I see it becoming more popular when it’s a good replacement for desktop technology and the DOM isn’t used at all (go straight to GPU). I’m a huge fan of WASM, but I also write a lot of web apps and don’t see a super convincing reason to adopt WASM to effectively make the exact same thing. As-is, it’s great for augmenting an app though.

Wait for garbage collection and sockets and you might see the paradigm start to shift.