rty32

I can't answer "whether censorship good or bad", but one thing I think is true and needs to be clarified is that there is a democratic process for such legislation -- representatives debate the topic and vote on them, and if they do become law, they may be challenged in the court. They don't just happen. By comparison, censorship in China is mandated by a number of different laws and "rules" with extremely broad and vague words, some of which date back decades, with the explicit intention to be able to arbitrarily enforce the laws based on whoever is in power to interpret them, and... good luck challenging them in courts.

Of course there are lots of caveats here -- e.g. in the US model, what if the executive branch, legislation and the court are controlled by one person (which we'll see very soon), and in the other hand, in China there is actually a parliament and a formal process for many of the legislations (even though that doesn't mean much). Still, at a very high level, there is a distinction.

I don't know how it works in other countries, but in the US you likely still need to provide a real address for many purposes (tax, immigration if applicable, etc)

The police could just find the correct targets and raid their home instead.

Maybe the best ad I have seen in a while.

It is one of the many things they strike against, and I imagine it's not the most important issue and they are willing to compromise on.

Also a reminder that just a few years ago, CEOs thought remote work was good, everyone was productive, and they didn't see how they wanted to force everybody back. No, it's not a privilege, it's just how you get work done.

Some of the initial predictions were indeed way exaggerated. But a fact is that their ad revenue has dropped a lot and they are trying very hard to get customers. I hear that a lot of ads come from obscure brands rather the big companies you see every day (I don't use it so I can't verify that first hand). Yes it is still running to this day, which is different from many people's expectations, but it is definitely not the company or the platform it was a few years ago, and it is unclear how long this could go.

> The contribution bot asks for confirmation the code change is copyright-free

A confirmation is simply unnecessary. Can't it work like, writing this somewhere that says, by creating a pull request, you agree all your code and the discussions around the pull request is now copyright free? Saves everybody time and avoid hassles like this.

The other side of this is I get very annoyed by CLAs -- there have been a number of times I want to contribute to Google and Microsoft's open source projects, but they all require CLAs which require me to get explicit permissions from my employer to contribute to those projects. It is possible, but is a slow and complicated process that nobody wants to go through at my company. So instead of creating a pull request to address the problem, I open an issue and mention how it can be addressed. Which may or may not be picked up by someone else who wants to work on this. This is just frustrating.

I had the same question, and this article definitely could have discussed other potential engineering approaches and why they didn't work to provide the full context. To be honest, I learned very little from the article -- I already know how rice cookers work, so I want to learn much more when I decided to read the article

Very naive take.

1. 10% performance improvement at Instagram could lead to many millions of revenue "instantly". It is not laughable at any company. 2. It won't be a 5000% performance improvement. Facebook uses its own fork of Python that is heavily optimized. Probably still far from C++, but you should be thinking about languages like Java when talking about performance.

"Better" is a very subjective term when discussing languages, and I hope such discussions can be more productive and meaningful.

You means apps written by Google as "native apps"?

Any use cases outside that?

If not, it is probably fair to say nobody uses this.

You are probably not solving the same problems many other people are facing.

Many such applications are accessible on the web, often with the exact UI. They may even have a mobile/iPad version. They may be big enough that they have a design system that needs to be applied to in every UI (including company website). Building C++ code on all platforms and running all the tests may be too expensive. The list goes on.

Have isolated web apps/web bundle gained any traction over the past few years? I just realized that this thing existed and there were some discussions around it -- I almost completely forgot this.

I did a search, and most stuff come from a few years ago.

This could be very wrong, but I thought DJIA is relevant mostly due to WSJ? Most publications care about S&P 500, but in WSJ they always quote DJIA first (for obvious reasons) and maybe mention S&P 500.

> it feels like something they'd be well-positioned to seriously take on if they invested heavily in it.

I agree, but history just proved that Apple does not care.

And let's be real: Photoshop is cross-platform, and lots of content creation software is cross platform (or a web app). There are many more content creators that use Windows than people here are aware of or want to acknowledge (on HN, sometimes you get the impression that Windows is a forgotten OS that nobody uses). Now, Apple is at a huge disadvantage for losing that market -- often you can only be a big player if you have enough users. Apple also is never known for putting apps on the web like Figma and doesn't appear to have plan to do so.

A similar example is the iWork suite. It exists, but neither users nor Apple seem to care about it.

In the end, they just kind of development native Mac OS software half-mindedly. Which is fine -- that's what they want to do.

Yes -- while many people don't want to admit it, and I myself kind of resists it, but YouTube has become a major source of content and knowledge (and increasingly TikTok, especially for younger audience). And there are lots and lots of high quality stuff, not any less worthy of a good reporting coming out of nytimes or New Yorker. It's happening, regardless of whether you want it or not.

Yeah, I read through the entire article without figuring out if it answers the question in the title. Too much ambiguity and hand waving without providing any actual examples or real arguments.

> like variables, loops, and control structures—Pascal presents these concepts in a way that feels grounded and accessible

How is any of that not "accessible" in popular languages that are beginner friendly like in Python and JavaScript? "Feels", are we actually talking about technical stuff that can be substantiated with examples or just sentiments?

> But learning debugging from a language like Pascal can be eye-opening because it forces you to think about what’s really happening in your code. Profiling, too, is something Pascal can handle well, even though resources for it are scarce.

What? Debugging and profiling in procedural languages are becoming more and more standardized with IDEs like VSCode which provide a universal/common interface regardless of which language you use, and they are getting pretty good. How does debugging/profiling Pascal force me to think about my code? I have been programming for 20 years and seen lots of languages and IDEs, and I am really curious to know what I am missing. This article does not say ANYTHING specific, just these handwavy words like "eye-opening".

Not viable. They are going to use user agents that look like those coming from completely normal human users.

"Verifiable signature"? That's a dangerous road to go down, and Google actually wanted to do it (Web Integrity API). Nobody supported them and they backed out.

I signed up for the wait list as well and got the email. However there is no search button on the web interface (free tier). Is there anything I am missing?

I think most people define "Intellisense" as "IDE suggestions based on static anaysis results". Sometimes it blends a bit of heuristics/usage statistics as added feature depending on the tool. They are mostly deterministic, based on actual AST of your code, and never hallucinates. They may not be helpful but can never be wrong.

On the other hand, LLMs are completely different -- based on machine learning and everything is random and about statistics. It depends on training data and context. It is more useful but make a ton of mistakes.

True, but hey, even if it's not production code, it may be an ad-hoc thing that never gets push to production, it may be code reviewed by C++ experts and improved to production quality. At very least, someone saved four days with it, and could use the time for something, maybe something they are expert at. Isn't that still good?

Wow, I love good, original programming jokes like these, even the ideas of the jokes. I used to browse r/ProgrammerHumor frequently, but it is too repetitive -- mostly recycled memes and there is anything new.

This is one that I really liked: https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/l5gg3t/thi...

> I don't think it would be politically savvy to admit it.

Depends on who you ask.

If Trump wins and Elon Musk actually gets a new job, they would be bragging about replacing humans with AI all day long. And corporates are going to love it.

Not sure about what voters think though. But the fact that most of these companies are in California, New York etc means that it barely matters.

Citation: MacBook Pro with 8GB memory, starting at $1,599, on sale right now.

Exactly. Even if you do C++ development using VSCode on Windows, likely you are still relying on MSVC compiler for the Intellisense (and of course compiling). And people who mainly write JavaScript/Java/Python/Go etc have never used Visual Studio for development and never will be. VSCode didn't replace VS, they replaced Notepad++/Sublime Text/Atom/Eclipse etc, plus Intellij based IDEs for some people.

My take is that those industries are also going to be very slow to adopt any AI tools, especially these, and for good reasons. We are looking at integrating LLM into our products, but we have customers that told us they can't use any of those, straightforward.

Care to elaborate on the idea? I suppose you mean that ads will come to this "computer use" tool itself. Now, will users keep it in the foreground, when they already expect the tool to do (almost) everything for them?

Found the vimmer

Not sure using a different OS helps the issue, if not making it worse --

* These days hackers have a lot of resources and are often nation state actors. They utilize 0 day vulnerabilities. I don't see how an obscure OS will do any better than mainstream OS in terms of detecting and responding to exploits

* Many hacks actually start with social engineering, and human becomes the weakest point (well, in some sense, it always has been)

* Users, most of which are not computer experts, could make more mistakes when they are faced with software/interfaces they are not familiar with. (I'm just making this up, happy to see data that says otherwise.) "Open suspicious links in disposable VMs"? Sure, if they have received enough training and can do it perfectly, every single time, and never confuse the VM and the host environment. I'd say "never open suspicious links, forward the email to IT to help with you if needed", or even, just filtering untrusted domains in the email, is a much simpler and effective approach.

That's why the original post says "like Airbnb", and laws like those in NYC ban all of them.

I haven't spent enough time with cursor specifically, but with other similar coding assistants, adding context can take some time. And often, even if it does save time, the action of "adding context" itself gets tiring and tedious so that you don't want to bother but instead just write the code yourself. It's about mental affordability.

Eh, people return their devices because don't know how to correctly use them all the time, I don't see how it is different here. And people definitely don't need to intentionally do this -- in the US, most major retailers allow you to return opened products within the return window (although it could get complicated with so-called "activatable devices")