devmunchies

He died a long, long time ago. Far away.

Great idea. And I get a Notification prompt that says "XYZ Corp would like to view MyName's AirTag location until Jan 27 @ 9pm" and I can choose to deny, or decrease/increase the time. Can remove them any moment, like when I receive the luggage.

Could there be a financial incentive for Apple?

You can share your location with other icloud accounts. There is no reason to share login credentials, especially with the govt.

I think Netflix is better served getting exclusive rights to top IP that differentiates them from others. They don't have many memorable brands that people would buy a T-Shirt for. Like a $5B deal for exclusive streaming rights to all Nintendo IP (think live action Zelda, animated Mario Kart series for kids, Metroid series for adults, etc).

A little hyperbolic marketing for AWS in exchange for a fat deal. This deal will probably help Stripe further penetrate fortune 500 companies on case study alone.

Well, even if "they both rose about 6 years", they aren't actually the same. I chose the lowest for a reason, since it shows a bigger shift in relative terms. Going from 22-28 is bigger percentage gain than 24-30.

It actually is the more impactful number which was relevant to my original point (people are staying in the dating pool for a longer % of their life)

I chose women because it was the younger age and assumed it was more relevant to taking half the population out of the dating pool, which was my main point. All these comments assuming it was some crack at women are wound too tight.

You say "lay blame" as if I'm being critical, when I'm just theorizing.

My non-scientific assumption is that there were less people who chose the lifestyle of "artists and writers". The sexual revolution took the lifestyle mainstream.

Those are scientific issues, but STD spread is also a by-product of social changes.

The median age of female's first marriage was less than 22 for 100 years and rose to 28 in the last few decades[1]. I would assume this results in a higher number of partners and more opportunities for an STD to spread.

[1]: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizat...

Yeah I was actually thinking that we may see API maintainers publish a lot more sample code with lots of different scenarios for AI to train on.

Similar to how JavaScript libs publish a Typescript type def file for people using Typescript.

I think it will be more like airline pilots with the addition of autopilot. Maybe you could write whole services, and networks of services with AI, but you need engineers to be the guiding hand. Engineers will always be better at using AI to build systems than non-developers.

Also, it’s worth pointing out that AI is using existing data. If a new iOS API comes out, the AI will need code bases with it already implemented to be able to train with it.

So in my mind, it will hurt the junior developers doing grunt work more than general devs.

I think no code/low code products are more of a risk to hurting devs than AI.

That’s all part of the lower level foundation library, which is what this post is about.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/file_sy...

oh I guess I did. thanks. should have said "I wonder if its better".

> Especially as in the second part of your comment you restrict shareability/usability significantly

no it doesn't. If my URL is `/thing#a1234` and I share it with you it will load my state for you. If you make a change, it's easy to push a new hash to the url that belongs to you.

> I am genuinely intrigued as to why that's better?

I didn't say it was better. We engineers are supposed to discuss solutions. I ended my last comment with "Just off the cuff thinking".

Seems like it could be better to store the state in a database and create a unique, short ID that goes in the URL, especially if your doing server rendering (like SSR react or HTMX, or rails/Django)

> I also didn't want to store anything on the backend (at least for the free tier).

You can make the state unique in the DB by a user cookie ID and then upsert the state which will overwrite older state with the latest state. Then you only have 1 record per free user. Remove record that haven’t been modified in 30 days and you don’t have much overhead. Just off the cuff thinking.

Yeah I work in the gaming industry. I was mostly daydreaming of that in the browser.

> it would probably start with a repurposed game engine.

Like the html canvas or webgl/webgpu?

I think it would be cool if you could encapsulate chunks of canvas drawings as components and have native dev tools for inspecting, debugging, etc.

Or were you mostly implying that the web would have been more immersive (3D) from the start.

I’ve never voted. Check mate.

I was born and raised in CA. Give me a break. If anything, I see myself as more inline with the classic Berkley-style, free will, spiritual esotericism of the 60s/70s. But like I said, political dispassion is beyond your comprehension, does not compute.

You people who see everything as a demo vs repub battle are tiresome. I couldn’t care less about political parties. I know that concept is unthinkable to you.

You’re grasping at straws. It wasn’t a political comment.

Utah already has the the drought, now it just needs the urban technocrats.

Let’s turn Utah into California. Drought and all.

Yeah, then maybe just shorten `fun` to `f` or `fn` like elixir. I think even just one char makes a difference over thousands of LoC.

How would we know? they’d still be private. A billion in revenue is like a public company 3-5 years after IPO. The aggregate probably is making quite a bit, though.

I meant there are other companies who are building their entire companies (not just features) on OpenAI’s products and those companies have revenue. Been going on for a couple years. I was at one such startup.

They are kind of like a Stripe or Twilio in that sense (in their current form)

> OpenAI is really strong tech without much product market fit

I wouldn't say that. There are a lot of companies making money on it already, there's definitely a market for it. They just aren't monetizing. It's more like how "growth startups" acquired users at a loss before turning on the monetization engine.

It IS reciprocal. You're welcome to present that "non-comparable hire" contract to the company before accepting your offer, but they no doubt will rescind your offer. You have the same right to reject the offer if you don't like the contract they present.

It's common for executive's lawyers to negotiate contracts with the firm before accepting an offer (including what the firm can or cannot do to the executive without penalties). I wish it were more normalized for ICs.

# Function Shorthand ####

I like how functions in js can be `arg => result`. In F# I have to do `fun arg -> result` with the `fun` keyword. It makes sense since `MyArgType -> MyResType` is a type signature in f#, but I feel like the compiler can just check if the arguments are references to types or are argument bindings.

# Multiline Lists/Arrays ####

I like how F# doesn't require delimiters for multiline lists.

So I can do `let myList = [1; 2; 3]` or

    let myList = [
      1
      2
      3
    ]

# Regex Literal ####

I like how in Crystal instead of doing `/my[regex]/` i can do `%r(my[regex])` where the parenthesis can be any brace type (like "(", "{", "<", "[") so I don't have to escape any characters.

# Argument Accessor Shorthand ####

In Crystal, you can use an ampersand to bind and access a property on an object, instead of writing the verbose form with a function.

So this

    ["a", "b"].join(",") { |s| s.upcase }

can be written as

    ["a", "b"].join(",", &.upcase)

If this were available in F#, for example, instead of

    ["a"; "b"] 
    |> List.map (fun s -> s.ToUpper())
    |> String.concat ","

I could do

    ["a"; "b"] 
    |> List.map &.ToUpper()
    |> String.concat ","

>If labor isn't productive that's not a labor issue, thats a management issue from them mismanaging their labor

You're assuming that any group of talented people can have a 100% track record of success. Some startups (or projects) just fail and it has nothing to do with the talent.

You gotta take bets on new products/markets and sometimes they don't pan out. Sometimes it's just a market issue. There's not always a way to know if it was going to fail beforehand either. If we want innovation, then unfortunately I think these types of sh*tshows are part of the deal, although a 17,000 layoff is pretty gnarly.

if the employees that were cut were working on a product that was losing money, then its more akin to liposuction. Its not about the employee's skills either, it's the business unit. If you start cutting database or network engineers on the AWS team, now we're talking about cutting off limbs.

Put another way, lots of startups are failing or are going to fail in this environment. Layoffs are like killing "internal startups" that aren't moneymakers.