igornadj

I'd love for this to trickle into macOS. Not being able to delete Apple Music or News is crazy. I will never use these, and them auto-launching all the time is very shitty.

Carry a computer around then. Most people want the assurance of knowing their phone works like a phone in an emergency.

I found it highly accessible and to the point.

Myanmar comes to mind

I assume the implication is that the author was allowed to ship the document or finalise it quickly i.e. move fast, but this is feedback for the next version or next document. In contrast to creating a draft and waiting 2 weeks for it to be approved?

I don't know what everyone else does but I have to write everything down, similar to this article, and the free-flow way of doing things seems to mirror what works for me.

One of the better write-ups on what tech debt is I've read.

The article goes into current AI techniques to reduce tech debt, and their (in)effectiveness. I wonder if another approach might be more successful. If AI could instead be used to solve the root cause, making levels of tech debt more visible to non-technical people.

Perhaps breaking up the codebase into components, and evaluating how "legacy" each one is, then creating a dashboard of each feature and the x multiplier for how much productivity is likely to be impacted. It wouldn't have to be exact, but as a tool for communicating the invisible it seems like it would be useful.

How do competing browsers make money? Chrome can do the same. It may mean users start paying for it, or ad supported in some way, which will be annoying, but even out the playing field.

The fact that Chrome is free is the problem. The fact they have such a leg up on everyone else is the problem.

Generally I agree, but this is one single paragraph of colour followed by the rest being straight reporting below, and adds important context.

I'm sorry but "we should be more adaptable" is clearly just misdirection from the actual thing at stake: the need to stop this insane rate of change caused by humans.

The fact that there were or will be future rapid changes is insignificant, considering their frequency and scale compared to human caused change. See the hockey stick graph or https://xkcd.com/1732/.

I don't know what feverish polarized politics you refer to since I'm not in the US but you have to understand that the words you are writing mirror the tactics used by big oil to delay change.

To tack on to the other responses, this is just good programming. The testability/maintainability/extendability tenets push you to write small pieces of functionality before wiring it all together.

99% of the carbon produced by F1 is from shipping everything and everyone around the planet. Shifting the focus to that 1% which doesn't matter at all is greenwashing.

Big oil sponsors don't want the real solution, carbon taxes, so they will shift the focus to anything else.

Does anyone else get the feeling that how we deal with technical debt in software is fundamentally and critically misguided?

How a pot hole gets filled in isn't a technical challenge, its a political challenge.

Developers can talk about the _technical_ side of technical debt all day long, but its a) generally well understood already, and b) blowing in the wind. How technical debt is handled is fundamentally a political problem.

We may understand this at a glance, but the solution of "gain knowledge and bring it up at standup" is not only not getting us anywhere, it's deliberately misleading us into thinking its up to us individually to change the organisation. It's as silly as telling the labourer that part of their job is to lobby the city council to spend more time and resources on filling pot holes.

Discussions on technical debt should be within the bounds of how to identify organisations where technical debt is identified as a real issue from the top down, and a survival guide for working in organisations where it is not.

Each cut isn't much, and there's no point stressing about it, but accumulate enough of them and it's a problem.

Doesn't the fact that everything is increasing in price also affect these labourers? Who see the prices in their grocery stores, cars, housing costs increasing, and then have to demand higher wages to stay afloat themselves?

Can any one cause be tied to the whole effect? No. Would [much] more aggressive anti-greed/anti-monopoly/anti-corruption handling of the economy stabilise inflation? Without doubt.

This is just unnecessary contrarianism.

Tim Cook in response to a shareholder proposing scrapping accessibility to improve ROI:

“When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI”.

We are coming to an inflection point where people will realise tech is not serving them and there will be a large pull back.

There is already something in the water with the realisation of what social media does to people, how unhealthy online communities like reddit are, how much emotional manipulation there is in news and entertainment etc.

Cutting edge tech is great, it's the late stage capitalism and the attention economy that has soured the meal.

That is one of the most interesting and frightening graphs I've ever seen. Way more impactful than the hockeystick graph, all of our efforts over dozens if not hundreds of civilisations leading to this, quick end.

The argument is a phone is a critical tool, an issue affecting your phone is much more dangerous because you may need to use your phone in an emergency. That is Apple's argument for why ios and macos are different.

If your need to document the world accurately is important to you, you should be using a dedicated device for that purpose.

People who fall from standing by their own volition usually have a sense something is wrong and can fall relatively gracefully. People who are tripped from standing collapse like a sack of bricks. Same thing, you don't see falls coming on these things.

Most likely anti-spam is a separate algorithm.

Elon has said he will open source the algorithm since even before the purchase. He said it is for transparency.

Social media algorithms have done a lot of harm, covered and discussed endlessly on HN, and transparency would be a first step to reducing that harm.

I believe the move is in line with his original motivation.

Would it be by far the most successful VCS ever imagined if it didn't have good taste?

When Apple argues why a phone is not a general purpose computer (and therefore should not allow sideloading), this is an example of why. A phone is a general purpose computer until you need it in an emergency, in which case it _must not be_ a general purpose computer.

Mark Cohen is 78 years old. He is not remotely relevant to the scene today. Photogs celebrate the people who came before them like Cohen or Gilden but you just don't see that type of behaviour in the current generation. Same with anything else really, older sports athletes are celebrated and at the same time rightfully criticised, older musicians, celebrities, the list goes on.

It seems you've had some bad experiences, that's a shame. But that's a hell of a broad brush you're painting with there, when there's so much good street out there telling beautiful stories from people we would never have heard from.

Yeah that's the thing, I don't find that. There are plenty of locals who shoot all over Asia for example and do just fine. I think maybe you're projecting.

Taking photos of homeless people is generally seen an unacceptable amongst street photographers. I think maybe you're focusing on a couple specific people?

> Most street photography that becomes popular is centered around people who are in distress

Absolutely not true at all

One thing I've found is that photographing strangers is a lot more widely accepted in places around the world with more community oriented culture, and less accepted in very individualistic cultures like in the West.

I think this individualism considers the act of someone taking a photo of you as a transaction, where people stand to gain or lose from it, and quite frankly oversensitivity over how it could affect you personally.

And this is in stark contrast to community oriented cultures where I think people assume good faith and fun and shared experiences. It's a breath of fresh air really, not everything needs to be analysed from a legalistic or moralistic viewpoint.

It's incredibly unlikely that your image will end up on a billboard with spinach in your teeth. It can happen, sure, but it's so very unlikely, and so overwhelmingly more likely to be some kid's hobby or for an humble portfolio. And it's sad that modern life in the West has made people so paranoid and afraid of everyone around them, so they miss out on this shared experience.