• 2 Posts
  • 120 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle
  • Well… sort of.

    Batteries perform differently under load. A battery that delivers 10Wh under a 1W load will probably deliver less (and get warmer) under a 10W load. Power supplies also perform differently under load, and DC-DC switching power supplies perform differently based on the output voltage. Generally, a larger voltage conversion and/or a higher load is less efficient. There’s also going to be some base power consumption in the circuit, so the most output power is probably achieved at some sort of medium load.

    To make things more fun, batteries are usually tested under constant current, not constant power. The increasing current as the battery drains of a constant power load will result in less total power, and constant output power often means increasing input power as the battery drains.

    In short, the real world is complicated. Giving best and worst case Watt-hours could be a reasonable approach.



  • Powerbanks are where it’s most problematic. They’re usually reporting the capacity of the battery cells in mAh. Those cells will be at 2.8-4.2V during operation, but the powerbank outputs 5V, or in modern powerbanks some higher number. 5000 mAh at the 3.6V average of the cells during discharge is certainly not 5000 mAh at the 9V it’s giving to my phone.

    It’s not going to give my phone 2000 mAh @ 9V or 18 Wh as the math would suggest either because it’s well below 100% efficient. I’m not sure what’s reasonable to demand in terms of advertising here since efficiency will vary with output voltage and output wattage.






  • There’s a significant distinction between servers that are actively malicious as you’re describing and servers that aren’t fully compatible with certain features, or that are simply buggy.

    Lemmy, for example modifies posts federated from other platforms to fit its format constraints. One of them is that a post from Mastodon with multiple images attached will only show one image on Lemmy. Mastodon does it too: inline images from a Lemmy post don’t show on vanilla Mastodon.

    I’ll note that Lemmy’s version numbers all start with 0. So do Piixelfed’s. That implies the software is unfinished and unstable.




  • Zak@lemmy.worldtoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldlightweight blog ?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Federation doesn’t inherently require large amounts of memory. Fundamentally, it’s a matter of selecting a list of unique servers (likely tens, maybe hundreds) from a larger set of followers (likely hundreds, maybe thousands) and sending an HTTP request to each when there’s a new post. There’s a speed/size tradeoff for how many to send in parallel, but it’s not a resource-intensive operation.

    Growth beyond a few tens of megabytes was a bug in Writefreely, which is a likely-suitable option several comments here recommended.


  • Zak@lemmy.worldtoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldlightweight blog ?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’d put it farther removed from the technical side than that; dreadbeef is thinking like a manager. OP might be better off paying a third party $3/month to handle the details and host a heavyweight, full-featured blog for them, but that’s not what they asked for.

    This is selfhosted, which I think implies a desire to self-host things even if it might seem a wiser use of resources to do something else.




  • Zak@lemmy.worldtoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldlightweight blog ?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 days ago

    I’m thinking like a programmer about what a basic blog has to do and the computing resources necessary to accomplish it. Software that needs more than a few tens of megabytes to accomplish that is not lightweight regardless of its merits.

    This comment seems to be arguing that one should not demand blog software be lightweight because there’s inexpensive hosting for something heavyweight. That’s a fine position to take, I guess, but OP did ask for lightweight options.





  • I see where you’re coming from now. In most English-speaking cultures, it is not conventional to use hand gestures as a substitute for spoken words in a conversation. Breaking social conventions for no apparent reason is at least potentially rude.

    You’re translating those conventions directly to chat. Chat is not spoken word, and it is conventional to use emojis, at least the really unambiguous ones, instead of typed words in chat some of the time. People do not usually do this with any rude or insulting intent.