And also:
* Potentially a mimic
It's just not worth the risk.
1,039 karma · joined July 26, 2024
* Potentially a mimic
It's just not worth the risk.
Applications are compressed bundles of some assumptions about how something should work and be interacted with. So you wouldn’t need VLC, it’s a shell around a foundational codec layer. Instagram is just a view over data in the Instagram social network, and you could customise it as you see fit. Transmit is a lovely application but you can delegate that to a fluid task layer that can do one-off tasks or make something you can re-use.
Everything in the fat ‘middle layer’ of software that is connecting a user to something foundational through interface assumptions might disappear, unless it’s more useful for it to exist as a permanent tool. Things that a lot of people share or that are more complex, Blender for example.
I also imagine there’d be a lot more focus on making explicit things like canonical records or schema, contracts, provenance, versioning, access policies, some kind of fixed views. Things that your local fluid interface would rely on the structure for when it came to connecting to your bank and doing whatever you want with your finances.
Not all software as we think of it might disappear, but the things that are lightweight layers over something more stable could all be subsumed with tools synthesised on demand.
Perhaps, at least.
Human language can be wonderfully descriptive or terribly verbose as a way of communicating ideas. Writing everything out and being forced to externalise it is its own cost, which pays off only when the space of work to then do collapses with as little feedback as possible (and, ideally, with correct outcomes).
On the other hand the ease with which you can simply get back more text to process means the upfront language heavy interface is now just returning back more information to pull back into your internal model.
Which, for me at least, feels tiring, and stressful when doing language-heavy exploratory tasks that don't collapse or resolve neatly and simply give you back more decisions.
For every MrBeast there's a 3Blue1Brown. For every recycled clip from a well-known TV series uploaded purely to drive ad revenue for a bot-controlled channel there's a fine art restoration video showing a very niche process with a real, skilled human behind it.
And so on.
I’m surprised they’re not charging on a $/GB saved model.
> I imagine if someone entered an establishment with their camera phone out recording everything all the time, they'd likely be told to put it away or get kicked out, too.
I agree somewhat, but I think it depends on the location as to how quickly people would react, and this kind of thing is almost expected in outdoor spaces, so the parameters seem different. Also, doing this with a camera phone needs intentionality from the person recording - they have to want to keep recording enough to keep doing it. Camera glasses just don't have that kind of friction, and it would be similarly easy to forget to stop them.
On the company side, while I think most people would expect that camera phone video does end up on social media eventually, it feels different when a company whose entire business is advertising and tracking is creating a product with passive, easy to forget and somewhat covert data collection.
Of course, those devices aren't made by a company whose sole purpose is the total and utter destruction of privacy, which is where this idea perhaps breaks down for the Ray-Bans.
Well there's your problem right there.
I never said there wasn't, but I also wasn't talking about human roles where people in larger creative teams have some kind of artistic say in the final output of a much larger process involving other talented humans. That is a very different example and I think you know that.
But you didn't create anything in this case. Not the images at least. Which then casts doubt on the rest of the writing in said blog post.