pyrale

47 ms·

871.
by pyrale 2y ago
This looks like an article written by a designer obsessed by how important design is, and how anyone could pilot a warship without training if designers made something perfect. It's a good reminder for software people sometimes overemp
872.
by pyrale 2y ago
> No, interoperability isn't perfect now, but it's a heck of a lot better than it was in the 80's. It was much worse, but, surprisingly, the desire to improve it was much more widespread. Lots of hard work got done to make
873.
by pyrale 2y ago
> Going into a court of law and saying that a company with 27% market share in phones and 13% market share in PCs is a "monopoly" is almost on the level of being insulting to the justices. Market share is irrelevant, though. As
874.
by pyrale 2y ago
> I think the problem is that Patreon still wants to offer billing options in the app. We probably will never know which of Apple or Patreon is guilty, unless Apple is forced to yield it in a future discovery, or is raided by some agency
875.
by pyrale 2y ago
Remove app stores completely, kill the "app" concept, and force platform providers to offer to browsers the same capabilities as apps. Browser capability has been stiffled by the drive from Apple and Google to favor apps (e.g. Saf
876.
by pyrale 2y ago
The article is filled with despicable stuff, but this one stands out: > Apple’s in-app purchase system, on the other hand, only supports Patreon’s subscription billing model. Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue
877.
by pyrale 2y ago
> These little bits of jank are why consumers can recognize webview-wrapped apps vs. native apps. That and, of course, the half-page box telling you how much better off you'd be if you were using the app.
878.
by pyrale 2y ago
> Have we really settled on objectively optimal controls? The cost of retraining the whole user base in a dangerous environment will likely dwarf any small gain from making "better" controls. As a case in point, the car in the
879.
by pyrale 2y ago
That is the case for most typesystem considered safe, save for introspection use cases. For instance, haskell, a language with strong type guarantees, does erase types for runtime.
880.
by pyrale 2y ago
Of course, Google would never give this data to a government that engages in targeted killing, Meta would never help out a junta repress their population, etc. The extent of the data collected and systemic consolidation between different so
881.
by pyrale 2y ago
It's almost as if companies implementing these systems have a vested interest in making the most adversarial implementation and/or flouting the law.
882.
by pyrale 2y ago
There's a difference between placing a sports shoes ad in front of a gym, and getting to know the history and habits of every person that ever entered that gym, and showing each a different ad. I mean, 30 years ago, we were horrified b
883.
by pyrale 2y ago
> In case anyone replies with "well all companies are bad in some way"... scale is also a factor here. Even disregarding scale, plenty of large companies providing critical service struggle to find good people to do their job.
884.
by pyrale 2y ago
> [...] and trivial problem. It just took decades and impressive breakthroughs to solve, I wouldn't really call it "trivial". However, I do agree with you that they're a class of problem different from problems with n
885.
by pyrale 2y ago
It's a bit disingenuous to pick go as a case to make the point against RLHF. Sure, a board game with an objective winning function at which computers are already better than humans won't get much from RLHF. That doesn't look
886.
by pyrale 2y ago
> But we also need the people who do like risk taking and new stuff The issue with that is that risk is usually not borne by the people getting rewards.
887.
by pyrale 2y ago
I don't believe it's your choice to make if you're not the one suffering the consequences. Or, as Alan Perlis puts it: "Don't have good ideas it you're not willing to be responsible for them".
888.
by pyrale 2y ago
There's actual risk that this "pro move" harms or kills people. fucking around and finding out is much less commendable when you fuck around with other people's lives and let them find out.
889.
by pyrale 2y ago
The issue people are pointing is that the author conflates "Cloud is good enough for my needs" with "CAP is no longer relevant".The point is especially annoying considering that the author works at a cloud vendor and not
890.
by pyrale 2y ago
I suspect you never needed CAP in the first place, because even outside of cloud, you don't seem to pay a lot of attention about whether your service is up or not or how to increase that uptime. In the same spirit, some businesses are
891.
by pyrale 2y ago
"...the problem with LLMs is they’ve got all this implicit environment that they carry around with them. You wanted a resume, but what you got was a LLM holding the resume, and the entire BANANA." - Joe Armstrong, in some alternat
892.
by pyrale 2y ago
Someone else tok ownership of the problem for you and sells you their solution : "The theoretical issue is irrelevant to me". Sure. Also, there's a long list of other things that are probably irrelevant to you. That is, until
893.
by pyrale 2y ago
> I think what you describe is called "extensible records". From what I read, gp only asks for a way to express the type, not a way to change/extend the type of something during runtime. Elm's current implementation d
894.
by pyrale 2y ago
Haskell does it just fine with the HasField typeclass, but like everything Haskell, it's not always easy to find the information. type HasFooBar s = (HasField "_foo" s String, HasField "_bar" s String) => s
895.
by pyrale 2y ago
Just like anybody can make a disney princess movie, but can’t actually call it that? Or just like everybody uses post-its at work but not everyone can sell it that way?
896.
by pyrale 2y ago
…Except, of course, for those who can no longer get insured. And those deemed at risk are not only people skipping jogging.
897.
by pyrale 2y ago
> But at the end of the day, todays Docker-based web app development delivers less than fat-client desktop app development delivered 20 years ago, as sad as that is. You mean, aside from not having to handle installation of your software
898.
by pyrale 2y ago
The ridiculous part is making this comparison on a per-country basis. Whole regions and their populations have been ruined by industries closing overnight to move abroad. Yet, by simplistic accounting, they should be considered winners?
899.
by pyrale 2y ago
Your question is also far from the mark. Plenty of people have to respect a much higher standard of accountability: did the CEO take actions to ensure that proper adherence to industry standard was respected? Which processes were put in pla
900.
by pyrale 2y ago
> for the new insurmountable levels of responsibilities right? As it turns out, companies that don't concentrate all of the power and decision-making in one person tend to avoid ending up with "insurmountable levels of responsi

More ›