Have you used chrome? The depth of enshittifaction is staggering. Setting it up from scratch is like watching a Cory Doctorow documentary.
The only change that’d get me to willingly use the engine would be the DOJ mandating the return of manifest v2 support and then barring google from contributing to it for the next 40 years.
It certainly has quite a reputation, but I suspect it has more to do with dense formalism that was quite unlike everything else. The language itself is actually surprisingly nice for its time, very orthogonal and composable.
> TypeScript is a wonderfully advanced language though it has an unfortunately steep learning curve; in many ways it’s the complete opposite of Go.
Replace "TypeScript" with "C++" and the same can be said.
It is one of the worst languages ever designed and already built on top of a sloppy foundation (Javascript) compared to Go.
The language encourages escape hatches and tons of flexibility on how it checks its types and creates the risk of inconsistency to engineers on which rules to adopt and there is always one engineer that will disagree with some settings and argue to turn on/off a rule to defeat the purpose of the language.
At this stage, its no better than C++ but significantly slower, and I've seen the same mistakes (enums, allowing "as XYZ" casting, etc) in C++ creeping into TypeScript.
Even the entire language parser and type checker is being rewritten in Go. [0]
what qualification does one need to be US President (besides being born in the US and of certain age)? celebrities certainly won’t be doing any open heart surgeries anytime soon :) so there are things you absolutely do not need any qualitications for (Actor/Actress, US President) and there those you do (Surgeon, Attorney…)
Am I the only one who read this and thought, "doesn't everyone self host a NAT gateway?"
Mine's in the living room, it says TP Link.
More seriously, NAT is fun and all but it can introduce unexpected behaviors that wouldn't exist in a firewall that doesn't do translation. Less is more.
If PL/I was like a C++ of the time, Algol-68 was probably comparable to a Scala of the time. A number of mind-boggling ideas (for the time), complexity, an array of kitchen sinks.
I find myself struggling to connect. I feel like we live in a dystopian period where its too easy to sit and doom scroll, and most people don't find enough value in just spending time getting to know each other, or economic pressures make social endeavours too expensive for many people I know.
Speaking from the perspective of somebody who used to do this for a living.
> But the incentive to making something open source is that someone might improve your work
Device drivers, particularly on mobile, aren't evergreen sorts of software. New hardware is released several times a year, and maintenance after shipping is limited to critical issues. By the time it hits the market, the people who developed that driver have moved on to newer products.
> It is somewhat arrogant to assume that nobody else out there could possibly improve this code or add value
Whatever they did would have completely missed the release schedule. It may provide value to people who want to keep using a 10 year old phone, but how does that benefit a company that only makes income when they sell new models?
> Just like it is arrogant to assume that your competitors don't already know your 'secrets' and haven't reverse engineered anything they found interesting.
This made me laugh. You would be surprised by how minimal reverse engineering goes on in this space. It boils down to the same reason as before: by the time you have made any progress, the product you are reverse engineering is semi obsolete. The vast majority of the time it makes more sense to invest those resources into developing your own stuff.
That's my $.02 from having worked for four major GPU vendors out there. Upper management knows what they are doing, even if outsiders don't get it. The incentives simply aren't there for most GPU vendors most of the time.
Just a few days ago, someone replied to one of my comments saying that considering the lives of people who aren't born yet is a completely immoral thing to do, meaning making anyone alive today sacrifice something to protect the planet in 100 years is immoral. So I guess people can find all sorts of justifications.
This the standard current approach for most models/agent tools because models can do well at "make a plan for this" and "execute this step" but are less good at generating a response string that includes both the plan and every step of the execution without intermediate prompting/redirection/focusing. Helps fight context drift and maximize effectiveness/efficiency of the predictions.
Most advances in tools I've used in the last two years are exactly this sort of "automate the steering and feedback loop that the prompt goes through" automated-fairly-boilerplate-sequencing of refinement of initial idea -> plan -> execution -> feedback.
This quickly went from Brandolini's Law to Cunningham's Law. Learn how Apple's boot process works by explaining it wrong and waiting for people to correct you!
The only change that’d get me to willingly use the engine would be the DOJ mandating the return of manifest v2 support and then barring google from contributing to it for the next 40 years.