shuckles

> If Apple had supported open iCloud alternatives for backup and other services from day one, it woudn't even be a discussion now.

You think the OS vendor is unable to snoop on data written to 3rd party clouds from their devices?

No since I’m not making claims about the company and its marketing directly.

I wasn’t making claims that Apple was marketing one as better or implying some contradiction between glossy and matte upgrades, so this information isn’t relevant to my point. Matte has been sold as an upgrade in the lineup for a long time which is contradictory to the point I was replying to.

Your citation is doubly irrelevant because the primary benefit of the glossy upgrade in the year or so it was an upgrade (glossy has been standard for 18 years) was a wider color gamut and higher resolution, not the glossiness of the screen itself.

It’s classic Apple commenter not know about Apple. They offered matte display upgrades to the MacBook Pro almost 20 years ago. The current glossy black display only became a product line wide choice with the retina displays in 2012, likely because they didn’t prioritize getting an appropriate matte glass finish on the retina screens due to low demand.

Shockley Semi was founded 16 years after Hewlett Packard, so you have to keep reaching backwards.

> That can change on a dime.

People tried very hard to change it between 2020-2023 and utterly failed.

I did read the link. The people working on Sky were exactly the people tasked with making App Intents usable, so again it doesn’t make sense why you give a bunch of credence to semi-public demoware in one context versus demoware you don’t have access to. Ari worked at Apple for a decade and Shortcuts went nowhere. Then he made a demo that was acquired by a company that’s buying a lot of teams with good demos. What’s the huge miss, nothing has actually shipped.

> comparable yet notably omitted from the ranges the tribunal considered

Interesting to accuse people of not reading the document in a post where you don’t read a 3 sentence comment (and reply to the wrong one, but we can chalk that up to HN UI).

> comparable yet notably omitted from the ranges the tribunal considered

Interesting to accuse people of not reading the document in a post where you don’t read a 3 sentence comment.

That’s a weird claim. Sky never shipped anything, and they’ve been building for 2 years. You don’t think Apple has any internal demos that are comparable? How do you know?

Wow sounds very comparable yet notably omitted from the ranges the tribunal considered. Sounds like you agree with me that they just made it up? Or are you saying that it's fair to exclude the app store of an open platform which has plenty of "free market" competition from side loaded and 3p distribution apps because ~vibes~?

It's certainly true that iOS's strict sandboxing and aggressive resource management probably made life harder for them, but that doesn't excuse the lack of deep integration for 1p automation. That's the kind of stuff AppleScript allowed two decades prior without any background runtime.

For the record, I doubt the CTO of OpenAI is the best person to fund if you're looking for trade secrets on training and deploying SOTA LLMs. They are two levels too far from reality to know anything useful.

Consider Google Play, for starters.

Workflow / Shortcuts was a neat idea that never really worked or expanded beyond a small group of users. I don't think you can really extrapolate "great hackers" from that. The programming interface they exposed was truly awful and the tools around it weren't much better.

It's a demo of how macOS accessibility APIs and app intents can be used to provide context aware AI agent.

Judgment can be grounded in reality or it can be picking a random subrange of a list of somewhat random ranges and then picking a midpoint because why not.

Or Spotify, a common complainant, who pays Apple $0 because they only sign up accounts on their website.

Where does this meme come from? Spotify pays Apple nothing more than a $99 developer fee, and the streaming music business would not exist in its current form without iPhone.

TLDR: they made it up.

Because she was CTO of OpenAI.

Because everyone involved is in on the grift and the money comes from the taxpayer's budget.

The Dreamliner had PMF issues? Hasn't it been a hugely successful point to point widebody?

This is bad data analysis. It has all kind of issues: using correlation to imply causation without any proposed causal mechanism; various selection bias; no context given for how the companies analyzed were selected; laughably large ranges for data points; etc.

One of the worst parts, in my opinion, is how the author misunderstands the meaning of "Actually Indians," which is about the data labeling workforce, not the white collar technical workforce.

Extremely funny to speak on behalf of the continent about a niche EV brand that nobody has to buy if they don’t want to.

One that doesn’t force every major cloud host to be blind to encrypted child porn on their hard drives.

See this is the type of hysterical flattening I was referring to. There is meaningful distinction in the details, such as Apple’s implementation being non-targetable, but if you think all client side scanning is the same you will concede everything.

Why do you think the EU hasn’t opposed Apple’s plan to notarize every app, even sideloaded ones? They like the censorship potential.

When Apple attempted to anticipate these laws and propose a system which tried to navigate a compromise, the “pro-privacy” faction was so politically dumb they spread FUD about it and actively made sure no reasonable compromise could ever be reached. Now the public with reap what these advocates have sowed, good and hard.

With regards to the FBI incident, Apple said at the beginning of their statement, “This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.”

The EU is proposing a law. People assure me their laws are democratic and reflect the will of the people. Who is Apple to reject the outcome of public discussion?

The FBI letter was written in a context where an agency was acting without the support of the public. That’s why the framing was all about misuse of the All Writs Act and lack of Congressional blessing for the requested power.

I have a feeling people simply found other ways to be compensated instead of W2 income.