That's only one of the misspellings or incorrect words in this fairly short post. There are also numerous grammatical errors. Perhaps it's intentional, to show it wasn't written by AI, but I think more likely it's just sloppy and rushed. (The thinking in the piece seems as sloppy and rushed as the writing.)
Have they announced that it definitely won't be? If not, it might be just a roll-out hiccup, because Argon is available to me as an agent in Xcode and I only have a Gemini Pro subscription. (Whether or not I'll ever use Argon in Xcode is a different question. I've been so impressed by Claude that I rarely even use my Codex sub. I'll be very interested to hear from others how well Argon does with Swift and SwiftUI.)
But Microsoft and Meta are not blocking competitor tools for internal use, they're merely trying to reduce costs and divert a fraction of use to their own technologies. Microsoft and Meta are both still spending nine figures a year on Claude, and the article does not state or imply they're even considering a complete halt.
It's very unlikely that person is either new or unfamiliar with the guidelines. They almost certainly created a throwaway account specifically because they know the guidelines and want to flout them without consequences. (It seems like there has been an uptick in the number of these kinds of throwaway flame comments. I wonder if HN tracks that?)
Would you mind sharing how much it's costing you? I've been wanting to use APIs from within Intellij, but I hesitate because of uncertainty about the cost.
On a somewhat off-topic note, it seems like even the richest publications no longer employ copy editors, or not enough of them anyway. I am constantly spotting obvious and stupid errors in articles (e.g., duplicated words and misspellings) in the New York Times, Washington Post, et al. I'm certain it didn't use to be that way. (Fact-checkers also seem to have gone extinct; at least once or twice a week I'll read a news article with a glaring factual error or an absurd mathematical error.)
I suspect the author was thinking "homogenizing" but his brain picked pasteurizing by accident. Pasteurizing and homogenizing are both things done to milk, but homogenizing has an additional meaning of making something uniform (and more loosely it's often used to imply that you've made something generic, bland, and boring).
I believe people are downvoting this because it seems AI-generated, but this user has been posting comments/summaries exactly like this since long before ChatGPT existed.
If HIV had been or become an airborne virus when it entered the human population in the early 1900s, there's a pretty good chance it would have been an extinction event for the human race. I suppose there might have been a few isolated pockets of humans left in 2026, but I would not personally ever use the words "good news" to describe an outcome that reduces the human population to a few thousand people.
It definitely does. As I just learned today, Costco stores source buns from different local/regional bakeries, so the size and quality can vary widely. I also learned that people have been complaining about the Costco hot dog buns getting smaller for at least a couple of years now.
One professor in one class has not fixed the problem. You can't generalize that to the whole university. Even for that one professor/class, it's not the case that the problem can't be fixed (it could be, quite easily), it's that the professor evidently cares so little about doing their job as an educator that they simply should no longer have a job in a university.
I've noticed the occasional momentary failure to resize a window, and this probably explains it, but it's worth noting that the cursor changes to a "resize arrows" cursor when it enters the resizing zone, so as long as I'm paying attention I know exactly when I can or can't click and drag to resize. It is preposterous that much of the zone actually lies outside of the visible bounds of the window.
In what way does it make fun of it? It's simply an example of it. And with no apparent way to turn it off. (Edit: There is a non-apparent way to turn it off. I still think having irritating visual effects doesn't constitute making fun of irritating visual effects.)
One time in Boston a stranger literally pulled me back to the curb as I was about to walk out in front of a turning UPS truck. (This was long before smartphones; I was just being an oblivious idiot without any technological assistance.)
Similarly, my sister-in-law is a hospitalist, so I've come to consider it a commonly used and widely known term, but now that I think about it I don't believe I've ever heard anyone use the word except in conversations with my sister-in-law and brother.
It's not going to be good, but it's really just an accelerant for a denial of reality that's been building for a long time. I mean, there are corners of the Internet where people still vigorously deny that video of planes hitting the World Trade Center towers is real. (Or, more recently, that Charlie Kirk was actually shot.) I wonder if we'll soon see a "War of the Worlds" kind of panic touched off by very convincing AI-faked news reports and first-hand videos of [something], with a significant number of people so deep inside their insulated social media bubbles that they don't even see all the other people saying "hey, this is a bunch of crap that's not actually happening."
The paragraphs on all pages are formatted quite narrowly, displaying only 3 - 6 words per line.
If this bothers people, it can also be changed with Stylebot or the like, using a rule like this to change the max-width, which is set to 400px, to a larger value:
Exporting fossil fuels nets the government <$150 billion per year, while the federal government's debt is >$37 trillion (and growing by trillions per year). It's impossible to expand the sale of fossil fuels enough to make any kind of noticeable dent in the debt.