Also a lifetime pass Plex user, I'll leave as soon as someone has a good solution for identifying raw Bluray rips automatically. Why do I have to manually name the episodes? We had CDDB last century, why isn't there an equivalent for raw video rips? The ripped data should be identical, a simple hash should uniquely identify it.
Now if only they hadn't discontinued the Mac Pro. Could be quite the AI machine with multiple compute GPUs at higher bandwidth than an external Thunderbolt enclosure.
That's the Sign in with Apple domain, not the Hide My Email domain. HME is remaining at icloud.com instead of moving to private.icloud.com as well. From the linked article:
> After further consideration and reviewing community feedback, iCloud+ Hide My Email addresses will remain on icloud.com.
Making animations faster is one of the main reasons why, despite all the glass effect rendering, the 26 Apple OSes can feel faster than their previous versions. (Not always, of course.) They simply shortened the animations. The 27 versions do the same thing. Of course, this doesn't help all interactions, but it definitely improves the first impression.
Title doesn't match the article, which is currently "Apple changes its rules for personalised advertising in apps".
Apple gave itself better dialogs for the permission prompts, which they will now equalize (perhaps just in the EU?) with the prompts they use for their own apps.
My understanding of ATTF is that first-party tracking needed no disclosure other than the information declared in the app's App Store privacy section about the information gathered. If you made a suite of 20 apps, you could track usage across all of them without issue, as long as you didn't also share that info with a third party.
Not any more accurate than it is to say the electronic storage and compute of any computer is defeated by the latency of its memory. Virtually all early memory devices were deeply limited.
Really the ABC was most limited by its use of a custom I/O device which used electrically burned holes in special paper to input the initial problem state and output the solution. Atanasoff never got it working reliably, which is the main reason the ABC was never fully functional before WWII.
In any case, the fixed nature of the ABC is often why its considered the first "digital electronic computer" and the ENIAC the first "general purpose digital electronic digital computer" (or later, the first "programmable digital electronic digital computer", after it was rebuilt in '46 - '47 to operate more like a modern computer).
Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with Zuse's computers or the Colossus to say if those statements are really accurate.
The ABC's memory was not mechanical, even if the drum was driven directly by an electric motor. It was a self-refreshing series of capacitors using the same general mechanism as modern, non-persistent memory (self-regenerating I think?). It's was one of the other parts of the ABC that invalidated the Eniac patents, in addition to the ABC's binary adders. But the memory itself was entirely digital.
I heartily recommend both (if you can find them) "The First Electronic Computer: The Atanasoff Story" (for a technical look at the computer itself, by Arthur and Alice Burks) and "Who Invented The Computer?" (for a history of the ABC as it applies to the patent trial, by Alice Burks).
That doesn't really make sense, as being open source really has nothing to do with whether the language has an open evolution process. And if they've already declared 1.0, then they've already decided they're stable, so the original point doesn't apply any more.
I feel like they're going to remain closed until Qualcomm is convinced they can't make any money from it being so.
1. It's not really the builder pattern, which, in Java, is what you describe as wanting: mutating a single instance. SwiftUI uses result builders to compute a single generic View from the "DSL", but you could do the same thing without the custom syntax, it would just be more verbose.
2. Documentation issue. The lifecycle is standardized, but Apple is terrible as documenting it all in one place. I found this year's "Dive into lazy stacks and scrolling with SwiftUI" WWDC video actually had a pretty good explanation, at least for the lifecycle within lazy containers.
3 and 7. Yes, Apple's tools suck pretty bad. Preview canvas is also still terrible, despite multiple attempts to improve.
4. Not something I've experienced, not sure what you mean.
5. Yeah, Apple's docs suck.
6. Not sure what you mean here either, our stuff looks pretty much the same.
Apple will likely never drop Obj-C, but it's been a secondary language for years now. New frameworks are all written in Swift, Obj-C is only used for existing Obj-C codebases.
Apple has been adding Observable support to UIKit as well, so it's easier than ever for state to be the source of truth in UIKit too. Anyone writing more than simple UIKit apps has known that for a long time, it's just big a huge pain to actually implement without a lot of custom code or a dependency like RxSwift. If Apple had embraced reactive programming 15 years ago, SwiftUI would be UIKit's new layout system, not a whole new API.
Personally, SwiftUI makes the 80% so much easier that, even if the remaining 20% requires dropping down to UIKit, it's worth it.
Can anyone recommend a more technical book on the design and operation of the Colossus? I've found Colossus, a collections of essays edited by B. Jack Copeland, but not much else, at least on Amazon. (Also interested in anything on Zuse's computers, as I've mostly studied the Atanasoff-Berry Computer and Eniac).
Wasn't the China collapse entirely predictable based on the rise of China's domestic auto industry? Why would anyone buy a Jetta when you can get a BYD?
Now just imagine they'd kept making the Mac Pro and enabled compute offload to GPUs. Or even just passthrough to Linux VMs. Would've been quite the AI machine.
And none of those things are a move leftward, simply a return to FDR's Democratic Party, where universal healthcare and equal rights first had a chance of passing. That a handful of democratic nominees (most of the Democratic Socialists you allude to simply won their primaries, they aren't in power yet) are on the ballot for the first time demonstrates that the party itself has, in fact, moved rightward, as they wouldn't otherwise need to be described separate from the party itself. And your equation of left and socialism is deeply flawed. Ensuring equal rights with the CRA and VRA wasn't socialism (which is largely an economic framework, not political), but it was certainly a move to left. So much so the country essentially repolarized around those positions. Oh, and you do realize the difference between federal legislation and local laws about who can vote, right?
> Also, the Democrat party has steadily moved leftwards over time.
What an absurd statement. During the Great Depression FDR was considering a worker's bill of rights that would guarantee employment. In the '60s LBJ used the specter of a dead president to push through the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts (which have been considerably undone). In the '90s, Clinton undid the what remained of the Federal welfare state in this country. In the '10s, Obama was barely able to pass legislation that forced people to buy health insurance. In the '20s, Biden's major achievements were largely spending related. So in what universe has the party steadily moved leftward?
YouTube actually supports H.265 and VP9 ingest, depending on the streaming protocol. I can actually stream 4K@60 H.265 from my Mac Studio with < 5% CPU usage due to the hardware encoder support in OBS.
In countries where meta-strikes are legal, the unions cooperate on basic rights, and strike together when needed. Such coordination is explicitly illegal in the US, and has been since the '30s (IIRC).
Simply being open doesn't make them good open source projects. Luckily the SPI shouldn't need to conform to Apple's release schedule, and should operate mostly independently, so the worst aspects of Apple's open source projects will be less of an issue.
Not optimistic here. While I'm glad the SPI guys are getting paid (that is, a full time job), Apple is pretty bad at open source and developer services both, and they explicitly call out developer identity as a future direction, which doesn't fill me with hope.
Like many things, it seems like a combination of all of those would work better than any single one, depending on the actual goal. If the goal is to help drive EV adoption, tariffs that raise foreign prices to the desired price point, rather than simply being more expensive, would provide competition to the America companies, perhaps driving improvements. Subsidies would help with labor and ensure the company keeps driving the right direction. Improvements to products can help sell "American made" as a good thing.
No, that's not AI in the context you were claiming. They use ML techniques and ML-optimized algorithms for their image processing, which can be claimed under the general AI umbrella, but they certainly aren't generating elements of the images captures by the camera app, which is what you meant. The leaf example given in sibling comment has long been debunked, and it's literally the only example of generative content injection claimed for the iPhone camera.
iPhones, no, there's no AI replacement or synthesis of objects from the camera. There were Android phones doing this (famously I think it was Samsung where it would replace images of the moon with a different image of the moon), and the Photos app has AI manipulation features. And most of the time, Apple's noise removal algorithm actually removes detail from images, most notably making text and straight lines wobbly.