blairbeckwith

The Verge is pretty well-known for their ethics policy [1] (they won't take money from any company they talk about) and that actually enables them to highlight interesting stuff like this that companies would never bother to pay to promote.

This article is actually the first time I've heard of this feature and I follow Apple news a lot, so I appreciate it.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/ethics-statement

Is there really a meaningful distinction between how libraries treat digital book licenses and physical books when you actually hit reality? My knowledge of how libraries work is very shallow, but I've always understood that they treat physical books as essentially consumable and have fairly high standards for what a "lendable" copy of a book is.

A purely assumptive example, but if a library pays for a 2 year license to lend a digital book, and the average shelf-life of a physical book is ~2 years, what's the difference?

I can’t believe you made me sign in just to downvote this.

Anecdotes, etc. but my 65 year old dad is pretty low tech and he was paying OpenAI $20/month before I was.

Netflix has raised prices about 25% at the premium tier since they released the ad-free version in 2022. The with-ads plan has also seen increases since launch.

I don't think there was any sarcasm there.

I'm sorry, I must be missing something. Which companies make up the index funds if (most) CEOs liquidated their companies and invested in index funds? And how would they liquidate at anything close to their valuation without being priced based on their future expectations?

Honestly, Zen has done a good job of replicating most of the best parts of Arc; the big missing piece, IMO, is Little Arc, which was pretty workflow-changing. I'd love to see Little Arc / temporary browser windows become more common.

But that's just ... Not what a bubble is. A market leader having viable competitors doesn't make them any less of a market leader, and doesn't make them "a bubble".

If AI as a technology is not a bubble, why would the by-far-far-far most popular consumer technology leveraging that technology be a bubble?

I listen to a lot of this world – David Sparks, the Relay podcast network, MacStories, etc.

I have been varying levels of Apple Fanboy over the years, but even when I haven't been all-in on Apple fanaticism, I've always enjoyed listening. I think it's because they're just people who are excited about technology in the way that I was when I was a teenager, before startup and VC culture got to me.

David Sparks captures all of this so well. The guy just loves technology while being kind, unassuming, and generous while capturing enough value to make a career out of it. It's the best, and I should find more people outside of this small niche to restore my hope.

I don't know if you have any data to back up your claims, and I have nothing to back mine up but anecdotes but – all of the most active people I know have kids and all my single friends are amongst the most sedentary.

I think you're probably right on a lot of this.

I do think the pace having more granularity than five seconds is important for anyone who's doing any kind of speed work, where a pace off by 5 seconds can result in a fairly significant variance. Admittedly I am not a total novice, but my 5k and 10k pace times are about 10 seconds apart, and I do some interval workouts at 5k pace and some at 10k pace. 5 second granularity doesn't give much wiggle room there! Although of course, GPS and cadence-based paces are also estimates, so maybe the 5 second accuracy is better than 1 second which could inpsire a false sense of confidence in the estimate.

As far as Vo2Max goes, totally agree – my lab test results vary widely from both watches. However, I think that actually makes Apple's 1 decimal place more significant – it has a lot of value in offering a fitness trend, even if it's inaccurate. I might train hard for 3 weeks and see 0 movement in my Garmin Vo2Max, whereas I might see a 0.3 increase in the Apple Watch. This is valuable for even the novice runner.

I would love to hear more about your opinions on this as someone who has been experimenting with as a semi-serious runner after years of being Apple Watch exclusive.

What I see is benefits around battery life, form factor (buttons are awesome), and good native support for "compound metrics" like Endurance Score, Hill Score, Training Status, etc.

But when it comes to actual stats and metrics, Apple Watch feels superior in most ways. Garmin sleep tracking anecdotally feels much less accurate. It baffles me that it only shows pace to the nearest 5 seconds during a workout. It confuses me that it only shows a Vo2max estimate to zero decimal places.

Then, Apple Watch is at least 10x more customizable via third party apps. Want a Whoop-like experience with strain score, recovery score, etc.? Bevel and Athlytic are there. Want a much more in-depth and customizable workout experience? WorkOutdoors puts Garmin to shame here.

What am I missing that makes Garmin so pervasive, while Apple Watch is derided as "not a serious sports watch"?

If you want to maintain anonymity, building a character with false traits could be a part of that with no desire for fame.

Has it been? I own one, did a bunch of research before I bought one, know others who own them, and the positive stories massively outnumber the negative ones from my perspective.

I am using the CalDigit TS4+. Expensive, but flawless.

TB4 should be able to handle that resolution – I am running 2x Studio Displays + gigabit ethernet + countless USD devices in to one TB4 port on my MacBook via a TB4 dock.

I think I agree that AI will be a net benefit, but in world where it is difficult to have a meaningful conversation with a human because that human is so used to talking to a chatbot or someone doesn't have the skills to research a problem they're facing because they've always had a chatbot to ask ... I would argue that something of value has been lost.

What's the opposite of the slippery slope fallacy, where we convince ourselves that there isn't a slope at all? I agree that there has been doomsayers with every technological advance, but surely there can be a point where a piece of technology truly does remove the need for people to think to a problematic degree.

Why do you feel like you “need” this, though? I think that’s exactly what GP is saying – not disagreeing that it might have utility, but that there is a cost associated as well. The world is just statistically not that scary, and it’s good to let our kids make mistakes and get lost and find their way and face adversity and survive.

Me and my wife differ in our perspectives on this. She is more of a “safety at any cost”, whereas I am more of a “free range kids”. I know the world has changed since I was a teenager, but our parents never knew where we were, who we were chatting with on the internet, and we turned out great.

Is there a good way to read your own books that you load yourself, across mobile (iOS specifically) and the Kobo hardware? That has always been what's kept me tied to Kindle. The iOS app isn't great, but the "email to Kindle" feature at least lets me send my own ePubs and keep them synced across both pieces of hardware.

I assure you that many people spend $300 annually on news and journalism.

I am not sure about the rest of their nice, but at least the Logitech MX Master 3 allows you to switch between 3 paired bluetooth devices via a button on the bottom.

They released new APIs and policy yesterday to allow non-Webkit based browsers in the EU, among many other changes to comply with the EU's Digital Millennium Act.

Phew, that was close. I thought I had missed a story about NFTs having actual utility.

> New research by Mastercard across 16 countries in North America and Europe revealed that 59% of people who identity as nonbinary say they feel unsafe while shopping

We should do what we can to make life easier for everyone, but we should stop encouraging and accommodating this “everything makes me feel unsafe” attitude. It harms everyone when we redefine safety to include awkwardness or very minor psychological discomfort.

It’s certainly believable that there actually was a real girl who was doing that at his work, but we should also probably stop taking comedic storytelling as truth without question. See: recent Hassan Minhaj controversy, etc.

how far do we take this? would we have motor vehicles if we knew how many people would be killed by/with them every year?

Consider that all it was trying to prove was that it was an interesting demonstration.