mortenjorck

Obviously a certain percentage of the user base is running lurid hypotheticals through the system all the time, but I don’t doubt there is a trust score of some sort that I would prefer to keep as high as possible.

Knowing Anthropic, this unfortunately might end up meaning a quietly quantized Fable on subscription.

- Huge tax write-off

- Commoditizes their complement

- If it succeeds, ultimately lowers the cost of triple-A game dev

A few mid-size studios pitching in to fund continued development on a Blender model could turn IdTech into a major competitor to Unreal Engine in a relatively short timeframe, ultimately costing them a lot less than licensing.

The build vs. buy calculus in game dev has been steadily shifting over the past 15 years, and when CD Projekt Red announced they were adopting UE5 for their next Witcher game, the writing was on the wall.

That said, Id could make a bold "commoditize your complements" move and open-source the latest, now last, IdTech. What Godot is to Unity, IdTech could be to Unreal Engine.

> After this point-when sufficient capacity allows us to do so—we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part of subscription plans. We intend to do this as quickly as we can.

From today:

> After July 7, 2026, Claude Fable 5 is no longer included in your plan’s weekly usage limits. You can keep using Claude Fable 5 through usage credits, which let you pay for usage beyond what your plan includes.

So in theory, it opens the door to returning shape-differentiated icons to MacOS if a future display theme (a successor to the poorly-conceived Clear and Tinted themes) allows the background to be minimized while the foreground is emphasized.

What I would love to see, and should now be possible, is a revision of the Clear theme where the squircle is transparent/refractive and the foreground retains its native color.

What a strange era we now live in.

A base-config 2028 MBP could be running local LLMs at a level unthinkable today.

It would be interesting to see more detail on how this vehicle is structured and what sectors the commitments are in.

Could someone clarify why having Sign in with Apple and Hide My Email on the same domain would make a blanket ban easier rather than harder? What am I missing?

So based on my experience with the verbosity and non-DRYness of LLM code, a solid 2.5x in value delivered. Not bad!

In Spaces' case, the problem is a combination of an overly rigid model (only two full-height windows per space) and high friction to management (the process of moving full-height windows from one space to another requires multiple steps). Traditional free-form windows are a little better, but it's easy to lose track of them because the overview itself requires two steps to access (open Mission Control, hover the top bar to expand thumbnails). These could have been gradually improved over the past 14 years, but Apple has somewhat frustratingly left these core workspace features to wither on the vine.

While linear window management is clearly not to everyone's taste, I still think it's a valid idea! It was heartening to see this launch and its reception, as I'm actually working on something in the same area right now...

Your post finally made it click for me – the aorta extending to the left gives the superficial impression of that being the heart’s location because it’s easier to feel the heartbeat through the skin, versus the more deeply embedded vena cava on the right.

Presumably this means, evolutionarily, greater vulnerability on the left, predisposing the left hand to shielding duties, leaving the right to more dexterous tasks like spearing. The cardiological hypothesis of right-handedness holds!

*For some definitions of individual agency. Incompatiblists not included.

We are infinitely complex arrangements of systems built upon systems, from the quantum properties of carbon atoms up through the proteins that make the “meat” we are so glibly reduced to, through the complexities and adaptations of mammalian bodies, up to the fearsome order of the human brain and the intricate sprawl of human society and culture.

To reduce us to anything less is to deny the awesomeness of the cosmos itself.

How does it work? I'm guessing it's some kind of extension of the LCD polarizer, but all I can find online are explanations of the software like in the Wired article.

"AI will change everything!"

Few seem to understand that both of the above can be true. The parallel you draw to the internet revolution is apt; dot-coms were both a bubble and changed everything.