the_other

> Poor quality comes from the fact we have outsourced manufacturing.

My experience with software development suggests this is not the main driver. The main driver seems to be management not caring about quality, UX, long term maintainance costs, externalities, and by viewing customer service as a cost rather than as branding.

This sounds like something I'd enjoy. Do you have a blog post or guide on your approach?

The "right" abstraction seems like quite an art. Sometimes it's not obvious, or it takes multiple rounds of exploration and testing (I'm thinking here of the mental shift moving from HTML + JS, via jQuery, Backbone, Knockout and up to React/Vue or Angular). At all points, we thought we had reasonable abstractions for a while. Vue and Svelt, or NextJS, now are so far from the mental model of early 00s "DHTML".

And I'm not sure how this relates to TFA's point. Are you saying we collectively need to get better at abstraction so that LLMs get better at abstraction (either by training, or our prompting), so that their code is easier to read?

My inherent pedantry drives me to say "this sounds like compression, not gating". Do lots of people use "gating" to mean "automated volume control"? In 30ish years of hobbyist music production I have only encountered it to mean "automated in/out control". It's "compression" that automates dynamics.

Thinking out load a bit here:

- maybe the existence of West-coast style "low pass gates" proves me wrong...

- gates sometimes have release controls, which would make them "automated volume control", but I still contend that aiming for zero gain when the gate closes makes them in/out controls not "dynamics" controls).

Most of those people wont be checking the provenance of the images. FB have stopped from their fact-checking processes.

Only the investigative or journalistically inclined will make use of this, and those people already fact check.

Where’s the en mass gain?

> Another way in which it's not cheap to lose sight, I guess.

True.

We can frame it even more strongly: "default societal practices actively discriminate against people with disabilities; they intentionally, consciously choose to make life harder for people who're disadvantaged".

TypeScript interfaces just merge. You can aet any property name you like on a plain JS object, at any time.

The CSS version is a risk, for sure. The dev tools in all the main browsers will tell you where the extension happens and show yiu the order the complecting rules are applied, so it’s fairly easy to debug. Bugs/misbehaving code is usually a problem of structure. In other languages, we take on the need to apply structure; just do the same with CSS.

The mechanism that allows this merging behavior is the means by which intentional reuse is composed. It allows yiu to set general and specific rules sets. This seems conceptually similar to OO classes and subclasses, to me.

> With CSS names are global.

In your "programmatic" code (your JS/TS, python, C++, whatever..) your classes are global. Even if the language supports flexible namespaces, or module scoping, you still have to take great care naming because reusing a name will cause you confusion. Giving two things the same name makes them harder to import, and risks clashes and bugs.

No-one complains about this. This is just how you code in all those other languages.

Mix this 3d graphics, with data science notebooks, with local LLMs, and perhaps an integrated coding harness, with visibility over your personal data and you’d have something absurdly good.

This might overtake “a haiku+macOS mashup” as my idealised computing future.

My banks provide different colour options for their cards. All my digital cards differ, even from the same bank. The alternate colours helps within the banks/ apps as well as within Wallet, so it's not just an iOS "workaround".

I agree, it would be nice if Apple added stickers, but the problem isn't, IMO, as bad as you make out.

Exceptions include transport and concert tickets. Most of the time this doesn't cause problems because I'm standing with the other people I'm travelling/gigging with, and the agent scanning the tickets doesn't care about any names on them.

Today? Not 23 years ago (approx) when they started scanning emails?

I don't think you're making a useful point about the situation.

In the case of the orange in the bag, both Altman and his interlocutor can see the bag and the truth can be exposed by rummaging.

In the case of ads in the oAI chat feed, at the time Altman made the comment he was probably planning to puts ads in the feed. But there might not even be emails about this, just conversation. And the engineers might not solve the "how" for a while... so there's nothing to rummage for.

However, in both cases Altman wants you to think something other than what's on his mind. There's an orange in his bag, but he wants you to think there is not. There's going to be ads because he owes the investors a tonne of money but he wants you to think it wont happen, or wont happen soon, or will be "nice" ads...

The distinction is in the nature of the underlying truth, not in Altmans words or actions in the moment. In the moment, in both cases, he's lying.

It’s easier to consider responses or solutions to specific problems, rather than to solve for a broad, general principle. You can see this in many areas of life. Solving for general principles requires group effort (usually); you can get buy-in from individuals if you csn focus them on specific cases or subsets. So the Floxk fetish is reasonable at this point, IMO.

There’s also nothing inherently wrong with carrying sensors in your pocket. The “wrong” is in the providers/manufacturers exploiting the position they put themselves in. Managing data is hard, and most people don’t want to do the necessary work most of the time, so the providers/manufacturers offer to do that for their users/customers. However, they also exploit their csretaker position by tresting the data like they own it too, and extracting profit.

If the solutions to the Flock problems could be framed such that other providers/manufacturers had to build systems that were “local first” or “private by default” (as in pre-internet home computing plus explicit, finegrained shsring consents), then it would also be fine to carry sensors. I want my fitness tracker and GPS. I just don’t want the data it generates used to build advertising profiles on me such that ads (and government mass surveillance dragnets) can follow my every other move.

Using a battery powered electronic device as a “pass” detected by another handheld electronic device, both of which are contacting cell towers, exchanging data with data centres 100s of kms away, filling out detailed profiles of user behavior … rather than a paper ticket?

You could think about it this way:

All AI prices will rise soon - probably shortly after the IPOs. The new prices will be eyewatering compared with today’s. This bulling change is lengthening the time until Anthropic have to raise the subscription prices, so those of us who’re not doing 24hr claw stuff can continue to use the tools the way we’ve gotten used to.

I'm a beginner with agentic coding. I vibe code something most days, from a few lines up to refactors over a few files. I don't knowingly use skills, rarely _choose_ to call out to tools, haven't written any skills and only one or two ad hoc scripts, and have barely touched MCPs (because the few I've used seem flaky and erratic). I answered as such and got... intermediate.

Yes, very likely. Even in the 90s 120min tapes were more fragile and much more likely to warp or get caught than the shorter lengths.

I read the implication too, as well as the fatigue.

They offered nothing to counteract the idea that we should just shut up and accept it. Then they closed with "And I actually like the concept of reward cards (although I don't use them) because it is pretty much the only way how you can make money off your data." - which sounds like they have given up opposition, and are now considering ways to profit from the situation rather than fight it.

As the attack actor now has the data, they're liable for ongoing GDPR failures, on top of the theft. Then anyone they sell the data to becomes liable (on top of handling stolen goods). Could be a money-earner for the EU if they pursue it properly.

Any functioning national health service. Any national education system. Transport networks. Nations with unprivatised water systems.

> Any selector with the " " operator on A risk expanding to the inner A even if it was intended only for the outer.

Then <a type=b> is potentially a <c>. Consider a small refactor?

SoC is how all maintainable software is built. A function for A, a class for B, DDD-spec'd modules and features, databases on separate machines, API definitions, queuing systems, event systems, load balancing, web servers.

You don't even need to think of the web to see how content and presentation are different. Try editing a text file with hard line breaks in and you'll quickly understand how presentation and content are orthogonal.

> At what point does the project outgrow the AI in your experience? I have a 70k LOC backend/frontend/database/docker app that Claude still mostly one shots most features/tasks I throw at it.

How do you do this?

Admittedly, I'm using Copilot, not CC.

I can't get Copilot to finish a refactor properly, let alone a feature. It'll miss an import rename, leave in duplicated code, update half the use cases but not all.. etc. And that's with all the relevant files in context, and letting it search the codebase so it can get more context.

It can talk about DRY, or good factoring, or SOLID, but it only applies them when it feels like it, despite what's in AGENTS.md. I have much better results when I break the task down into small chunks myself and NOT tell it the whole story.

Your two opening paragraphs seem opposed to one another.

> Some brutalist architecture may be preserved, as a warning for future generations about the danger of mixing politics, ideology and architecture.

> I am the founder of the architectural uprising non-profit in Norway. The primary goal of architecture is in my view to increase peoples quality of life and to ensure social, economic and environmentally sustainability for future generations.

Can you expand on the "dangers" expressed in the buildings, and how your foundation attempts to mitigate those dangers?

Also:

> Now lets face the fact that most brutalists experiments over the last 80 years has failed miserably.

Yeah, there are a lot of failures, but you've picked on two structures which are broadly successful which is diminishing your point somewhat.

I've visited a flat/appartment in one of the Barbican towers. It was comfy, pleasant. The lifts and hallways were well maintained, well lit, generous dimensions (compared with many London apartment blocks I've seen). It felt like a "good" tower block, rather than a "bad" one.

The arts complex is amazing (slightly confusing, but very functional and fairly pleasant to be inside). The outside spaces create a buzzy calm.

I think it's an excellent complex.

I agree with your points about the tone. Money Stuff is definitely more "fun".

I find the content differs between the two, not just the presentation. Odd Lots goes into the broad scale (national, global) backstory a lot more; Money Stuff dives deep into specific businesses, people, or the technical details of a trade. Maybe your circumstances and habits mean you get more from one than the other?

I wish Bloomberg would find presenters for UK or European centric versions of both shows.

No it wasn't. It was a tool to attempt to keep people on Google's surface area rather than freeing them to browse the web as the web was intended.

I think you have read the "redistrubute the money" people wrong. They definitely, absolutely want to reduce the power the tiny minority hold over the many. That's the whole point. The money is a tool to get the work done.

On the flip side, doesn't this mean that Apple is providing indirect funding (via employment) to any OSS project their employees contribute to during office hours?

In the UK we have a great big yellow zig-zag road marking that extends 2/3rds the width of an average car across the road. It means "this is a school, take your car and fuck off". You find it around school gates, to a distance of a few car lengths either side of the gate, and sometimes all along the road beside a school.

It doesn't stop all on street parking beside the school, but it cuts it down a noticeable amount.