Bluesky the company/app certainly isn't perfect, but the model they pioneer is very much designed to help fix this exact problem.
466 karma · joined September 8, 2024
Sucker for epistemology, systems, and languages.
@7hird.dev
Bluesky the company/app certainly isn't perfect, but the model they pioneer is very much designed to help fix this exact problem.
If your thought is just "disable automatic updates", there's no reason you couldn't do the same by declining new versions of a web app. Unless you built it yourself (as a web app or native app), you need to include the servers and DNS in your trust model.
To me, it seems entirely isomorphic. The only material difference I see is whether automatic updates are on by default (an OS/browser vendor issue, not anything inherent to the tech).
But two products that provide essentially the same benefit, and one is significantly cheaper? Corporations maximize profit, my friend. What the model has to say about Tianammmen Square doesn't matter when we're using it to write code.
The goodwill/propaganda are convenient, sure, but my guess is that they aren't the primary motivation. Another possibility is that if no takeoff happens, pressuring OpenAI/Anthropic on profitability would exacerbate any damage overinvestment has done to the US stock market/economy.
I'm hardly a fan of China/Xi, but I do appreciate and benefit from this.
AI trading and investment advice meaningfully changes the system and its dynamics. It seems highly probable that this will result in it failing in new ways.
[1]: www.expressionsofchange.org
All for what? To maintain the same market share they've had since the 80s? What a waste.
What difference does it make? I'm hardly surprised that they won't dedicate engineering resources to tech that threatens their bottom line. But it is a choice, and it's to the detriment of their users and I. For that, it deserves criticism.
The important point is that how OSs should (with user consent) grant installed PWAs access to system APIs like notifications. I'm just trying to condemn Apple's preferential treatment of native apps in this regard.
To all your points about a 3rd party intermediary, fair! Such an intermediary can be valuable. But whether we go through an intermediary is orthogonal to whether our app is running in a browser. Native apps can be installed without intermediaries (if your OS isn't evil) and there's no reason you couldn't build an intermediary for web apps.
As for your ProtonMail example... you got pwned. They just handed you some new code to run and you ran it. You could have ran the old code instead. You could have gotten a message saying "would you like to update?". You could compare the hash of content you received with others, tipping you off if you're being targeted.
To that, I imagine you say "but there's no reasonable way to do that stuff!"
And you'd be right. None of that is practical. Why is that? Is it some inherent difference between native code and code running in a sandbox? I think not.
This is pretty funny distinction to make. It's hardly a surprise you find web apps inferior if you define them so.
Whether through a store or browser, your computer is downloading code from the internet and executing it. A browser adds cross-platform ease for devs and a sandbox for security at a slight performance cost. A store adds gatekeeping (for better or worse) and a 30% tax. The other differences are UX choices from browser makers and OS designers, nothing more.
A given model is trained once but applied N times. A large enough N will dominate training, no matter how complex and costly it was.
But how long is a model useful for? How often will labs need to train new models? Time will tell.
I haven't played either yet, but I assumed this was about Gambonanza when I read the title. (https://store.steampowered.com/app/3509230/Gambonanza/)
I just might have to give both a shot.
Wishing Guido (gui.do) the best.