> the cost of changing v is p and the cost of changing x is F
I’m sure the equation is right and all but this seems sideways in terms of an intuitive explanation - velocity changes position, and force changes momentum. Force doesn’t directly change position (only indirectly via changing momentum) and momentum doesn’t change velocity, having momentum is consistent with a constant velocity. It doesn’t even make much sense to me to think of integrals as being about “costs of changing”, would that not be a derivative?
They use of horizontal layout is to some extent a chicken and egg problem, since support for vertical writing has been poor in many web browsers.
Vertical writing is often used in books, however, including ePub books that are internally HTML. With good enough support, it would be pretty reasonable to do a vertical layout for a serious news site, and horizontal form controls in the middle of that would likely be out of place. Physical newspapers, magazines, books, and manga in Japan are predominantly vertical.
Nothing actually stops the score from going higher than 140, it will just max out the visual dashboard at that point. On Speedometer 2, Safari on M3 Macs ended up over 500. At scores that high it’s harder to have intuition, thus the changed scale of the new test.
Speedometer measures web app responsiveness. Roughly, it simulates a series of user operations on web apps built with various frameworks (as well as vanilla JS), and measures the time it takes to complete them and paint the results to the screen.
The score is a rescaled version of inverse time - if it goes up, that implies the browser can handle more user operations per second, or alternately, it takes fewer milliseconds to complete a user operation in a complex web app.
We know that, but you haven't said anything specific about scores other than higher scores are faster, in an abstract sense, which has already been established.
"The score is a rescaled version of inverse time" is the key here.
If you run all the tests in half the time, your Speedometer score will double. If your score improves by 1%, it implies that you are 1% faster on the subtests.
(There are probably some subtleties here because we're using the geometric mean to avoid putting too much weight on any individual subtest, but the rough intuition should still hold.)
Right, but expecting the same behaviour from "Firefox" on iOS as on desktop is just not going to happen, since they have no control over the core engine. It's why, in general using iOS devices for cross-browser testing is pretty useless.
This is a fair point, though it is possible for app-level things that the browsers do to regress performance from the baseline pure engine level.
In this case, I think the 3 score must be either very old/low-end Android hardware or a measurement error. I don’t think any iOS browser gets 3.x scores, on even remotely modern hardware.
They don’t. If you read this post carefully, it just claims to be able to tell Intel Macs from ARM Macs. It can also distinguish from older Safari versions that don’t have the fingerprinting protection.
Safari has supported OPFS for some time. But Interop isn’t mainly a “please implement this” list, it’s a list of priority areas for browsers to become consistent with each other and with standards. If you think there’s a problematic lack of cross-browser consistency for OPFS, then definitely nominate it as a focus area for Interop 2025. Anyone is welcome to propose work items.
People who were wrong and change their minds should be punished less, not more, than those who persist in being wrong. The rest of the board is holding firm and preventing the problem from being resolved, so they are more culpable than Ilya.
This is more like a guy apologizing for the holes and actively trying to fix the ship. Which is absolutely worth something, even if no holes would still be better.
After seemingly being the front man in the firing of Altman he supposedly has put his name on the internal letter to reverse course, fire the board, and reinstate Altman.
I’m sure the equation is right and all but this seems sideways in terms of an intuitive explanation - velocity changes position, and force changes momentum. Force doesn’t directly change position (only indirectly via changing momentum) and momentum doesn’t change velocity, having momentum is consistent with a constant velocity. It doesn’t even make much sense to me to think of integrals as being about “costs of changing”, would that not be a derivative?