If you replace “AI” with “a software engineering team”, does that change your argument? It seems like you’re essentially arguing that APIs should be copyrightable, which seems like a Bad Thing to me.
3,891 karma · joined June 1, 2013
If you replace “AI” with “a software engineering team”, does that change your argument? It seems like you’re essentially arguing that APIs should be copyrightable, which seems like a Bad Thing to me.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/01/google-pixel-4as-rui...
I find the Signal devs' attitude so frustrating; they deliberately disable the ability to use Signal in secondary device mode for phone-sized-devices, because they know the Correct Way To Use Signal™ is to only use it on one phone-sized-device.
This was largely the concept of the Strategic Defense Initiative (aka Star Wars) in the 1980s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative
People always say this, but I haven't seen any evidence that it's true. In my view, the flying experience at least in the US has actually gotten better over the last few years. United, for example, added free seatback IFEs. (About 10 or so years ago, you had to swipe a credit card to watch anything.)
It’s like how having super draconian password reset and complexity requirements ends up being less secure because users will start writing their impossible-to-remember passwords on post-it notes.
For those "waiting for FDA approval", have you ever taken a vitamin supplement? Guess what, you're putting not-FDA-approved chemicals into your body.
Where is the BE-4 engine? Delayed, again and again. New Glenn, the rocket that could actually go into orbit? Same. So far their only functioning hardware (New Shephard) is, in effect, a glorified amusement park ride.
Considering that SpaceX has actually made it to orbit multiple times, any rational actor would clearly choose SpaceX over BO.
How is this at all obvious? I mean, even if we assume they're definitely fake profiles, wouldn't the more likely explanation be that they're individuals engaged in catfishing?
Still don't get how it was a problem for Microsoft to "bundle" Internet Explorer, but it's apparently not a problem for Apple to bundle and also actively block any installation of competing browsers.
It's the same approach as with antivax parents -- don't want your kids vaccinated? Then you'll need to homeschool them.
Just like with battery-electric-vehicles, there's a chicken and egg problem: no one will buy a car if there's nowhere to charge/fuel it, but no one will build fueling/charging stations if no one has that type of car. If Toyota was serious about hydrogen, they should have done what Tesla did, and built a countrywide network of hydrogen stations.
A common-sense change might be requiring minimum quantities of local signatures to limit the potential impact of a small opposition.
(For one example, check out the incomplete stub at the eastern terminus of I-70 -- I don't believe the cost of the land was a major factor in that case)
That sort of belief is what gets you to situations like what we see in Myanmar, with “declaration of fraud” being the only excuse for installing any leadership.
Type 1: "It's obvious that remote work is the future, and anyone who thinks otherwise is stuck in the past"
Type 2: "Remote work is infinitely inferior to office work due to the lack of socialization/collaboration/food/etc"
Evidently the leadership at Docker is type 1, based on their "step 4". The part I find particularly interesting about this trend is that both camps can't seem to fathom that the other could possibly exist (see: any HN discussion thread about remote work)