My intuition is that network transfer uses almost no energy, on a marginal basis, because the network links are always on anyway. When you pay for bandwidth, you're paying the amortized costs of building and maintaining the infrastructure.
Rendering a SPA on a client device consumes CPU time, which definitely uses energy proportional to the number of client devices.
Assume the server uses less clock cycles to render than the client--e.g., because of optimized software, hot caches, or tuned hardware.
Therefore rendering on the server should always be more energy efficient than on the client.
If Apple is so good at chip design why don't they just pivot to that? Then we can all standardize on the single (objectively superior) software stack that is Android. There is a lot of money to be made with licensing and they wouldn't need to run a huge supply chain anymore. It doesn't seem right that the best architecture in the world is locked in to a very specific ecosystem when the whole world could be benefiting from their innovations.
What's stopping someone from running a Lyft-like service "dry" (without payment processing) and just matching riders with drivers, with the expectation of paying cash or Zelle
I mean other than the fact that it would make no money.
What could California do to the developers of such an app?
Yes, everyone knows this but you're not supposed to mention it. If you have green bubbles, you risk being a social pariah. Android use among teenagers, who are most susceptible to peer pressure, is >80%. Also I know several guys who switched to iPhones and suddenly had a much better sex life. It is what it is. Think of Apple buy-in like a tribal tattoo or rite of passage for young people.
If Apple released iMessage for Android or made it compatible with another protocol like RCS/WhatsApp/Signal/etc., then Apple would lose half of its market cap. I'm not exaggerating.
Idk, $120k is still a lot. You are still begging the question that money even matters. There's an elephant in the room:
Basically men have vastly overestimated the importance of wealth.
A chart of the importance of wealth would drop off a cliff as you go from third-world conditions to a non-starvation civilization. Then it approaches zero as you get to NYC/SF where literally everyone is rich or else they wouldn't be living there. Guys who get mail order brides are basically arbitraging this (probably temporary) geographical difference in the importance of wealth.
After doing the hard learning, you can lecture your intuitive mental model you have. But it's difficult to install that mental model into a beginner's mind. Often the intuitions are illusory mnemonics for the deeper understanding, which if you never learned in the first place would just point to nothing. You have to do the hard learning to arrive at the "intuitive" mental model.
People want intuitive explanations because it seems the easiest. It is, that's the problem. Learning is supposed to be painful. You have to get your hands dirty.
It's easier to feel that you know something than to actually know it.
I've done this a couple times, and I think it's sufficiently difficult that if in the future I were hiring for a Linux sysadmin, I'd have them set up a mail server (that doesn't get spamfiltered) in less than 24 hours.
I never got spam filtered once DKIM/SPF/rDNS/DMARC were properly configured. I think _this_ is the myth that Big Email spreads. Linux mail servers are hard, but getting past filters is actually not hard. Spam filters are really good today not just in their true positive rate but also their true negative rate.
Given that a lot of services use your email as a 2FA mechanism, I wouldn't want to use a self-hosted mail server as my _only_ personal mail. You have to have a good reason[1] to make the time and maintenance commitment.
Rendering a SPA on a client device consumes CPU time, which definitely uses energy proportional to the number of client devices.
Assume the server uses less clock cycles to render than the client--e.g., because of optimized software, hot caches, or tuned hardware.
Therefore rendering on the server should always be more energy efficient than on the client.