> Reviewing code is still way faster than writing code.
Writing code results in a much better understanding of the code than reviewing it
In fact I would say that in large complex codebases, in order to develop the same understanding of what the code is doing might actually take longer than writing it from scratch would have
That's fine with me actually. I recently had an appointment where the doctor asked if he could use AI notes, I said yes, and meeting was so much nicer than before when the doctor is typing half the time. We can have a real conversation, nothing I say is missed, and later on the doctor can use AI to cross reference results or whatever else with our past discussions. That's win-win all around.
The cases I've heard of where AI doctor notes went badly, is in recording numbers that another doctor relies upon. If it's just a casual conversation, it's probably okay. If it's about cancer treatments, maybe ask for manual notes.
I've had doctors write horribly-incorrect notes in my digital chart after appointments, so please don't think I'm trying to be a Luddite.
Register your own domain and use that for your email, and you'll no longer be held hostage by Google. Takes almost no effort and will cost you a few dollars a month.
While I agree with your suggestion (that's what I've doing for years), I'm not sure the "almost not effort" point is helpful or realistic when it comes to a huge majority of users.
Apart from people who are knowledgeable or at least curious enough to search for alternative options, I suspect many people don't even know what a domain is or that they could register one for them to use. The jump from "why pay for email if Gmail/Outlook is free?" to "register a personal domain and use it for your emails" is too big.
I don't have the ideal solution but what I've suggested to friends and relatives is they should consider paying for their personal email accounts. Most of them don't care but some do and, as a result, at least try to understand what they want or need and are willing to pay for.
Even if your time is worth $0, you're paying far more than a few dollars a month to have a google account. Price discrimination from third party vendors is probably running you 5-10% of your credit card bill every month.
Democracy is the style of ruling where majority's ignorance dominates over the vulnerable. You will be eventually forced to use internet and forced to use the way your government wants you to use it.
Yeah, fair point. They're certainly trying to push it in that direction but so far there are still alternatives. I've seen age verification get a hell of a lot of pushback so that's encouraging.
I can set up all of the personal services I want. The average person does not want to do that. They do not have the skills, and it does not add value for them to do so 99.999999% of the time.
The tools and offerings we're given are built to fulfill the needs of the greatest number of people. For better or worse, those people are not people who want to mess with the infrastructure around their email.
Because when most people use the one email host, they neglect all other users. Even my yahoo email is regarded as second grade citizen now. A hospital straight told me they refuse all yahoo addresses.
I mean, that's certainly retarded, but most businesses aren't that stupid in how they choose to run things. I've never, not even once, run into a business who cares what your email is. They will use any address you want, whether you have a known provider, or self host.
I know this ^ seems unreasonable, but I know you’re right.
Mostly because of conditioning: it’s been 25 years now that free webmail is the way Gen-X, Y, Z, and future generations do email. Boomers and the older Gen-Xers may still be hanging onto an ISP address, if they haven’t moved too much since the 1990s.
After all that, plus with their email addresses being the opposite of portable, there is no limit to how much crap people will take, when the alternative is learning a little bit about domain registration and DNS, and paying $60 a year for Fastmail or whatever. Email, they believe, is supposed to be free as in beer.
Sad but true. Also, confession: I used to use first name @ full name . com and got tired of the confused looks and typos when I had to give it out, so now I use a six-character Gmail with numbers so that it’s just like people expect.
But what do you actually use as the email host? If you just set up your own mail server, you're almost certainly going to have everything you send go straight to spam.
You still need to register with someone like google, or Proton, etc.
> you're almost certainly going to have everything you send go straight to spam.
I run my own email server on DO, nothing I send goes to spam. (I normally follow up on nearly all emails in case you're assuming some flavors of sample bias.)
Believe it or not, email service providers actually exist.
Rollernet.us is a good one. They have excellent deliverability, reasonable prices, and everything you could want related to email.
They have a few minor other services, like DNS management, but they are not a cloud compute provider.
Another option is to use a cloud compute provider like AWS. You don't need to run the VM yourself to use SES for email messages. The hard part is the webmail access: you have to choose between a poor interface (an S3 bucket) or running a managed VM to host something like Roundcube.
Yeah, but you're not beholden to them. There are 100 different hosts you can use if you own your own domain. If a host changes in a way you don't like, just move your domain elsewhere. If you're using Gmail, you're stuck with Google. Being independent of any one host is the important part to me.
Personally I have my own mail server and use smtp2go for sending which handles the deliverability issue. I'm not sure it's worth it going this way but I found it fun and its been 0 maintenance
I have done as OP suggested and the main benefit is that I can move my email elsewhere.
For now my email is with Apple, since they offers email hosting as part of the icloud+ (or whatever its called). If they decide to die/enshittify, then I can move to another host without having to change any contacts.
One the other hand, since I did use my bare gmail for some years, I am still stuck with it, in case I have some service that depends on it.
I switched from self-hosting to Apple’s servers a year or so ago and it’s been splendid. No issues sending to other servers, decent spam filtering, and no nickel-and-dining for having more than one domain, or more than one user, or adding email aliases. If you’re already paying for iCloud+, there’s no extra charge for it.
I don’t wanna sound like a salesman. It’s just that it’s been a surprising good experience for my family, especially for the price tag of $0. And if it ever does start to suck, I can point our domains at a different server.
Not at all. As a KDE Plasma user, I love and donate to open source.
I'm arguing that the current climate of "vibe code a startup a day" is unsustainable, terrible, and should NOT be the thing people strive for. Instead of appeasing VC firms, that energy can be better spent on passion projects or contributing to other open-source projects like KDE / Linux / GrapheneOS / etc..
They're different goals though. Someone selling software is doing it to put a roof over their heads and money in their retirement accounts. If you straight up replace that with working on passion projects and giving them away you get.. homeless people.
I'm not sure the starving artist is an ideal to strive for, either. Surely there's a middle ground?
JetBrains' lifetime "subscription" which gets locked at the version you paid for seems fair to me
I don't see why you can't work on something you're passionate about and make money from it. For those of us not retired, the money is essential to make it sustainable.
> That's not "AI tries to design something". That's an AI that has been trained, by the prompt stack, to behave like a senior designer with a working filesystem, a deterministic palette library, and a checklist culture
What, you don't want your senior designer to have a working filesystem and checklist culture? No deterministic palettes?
Not really. A person will eventually drink dirty water if it was the only thing available in a desert.
There's very little competition for SOTA models. The models themselves also weren't built by Claude. The current revenue has almost nothing to do with what Claude built.
Hell if it was so far ahead then they wouldn't be desperately trying to block OpenCode.
> The models themselves also weren't built by Claude. The current revenue has almost nothing to do with what Claude built.
Ummm, no. Anthropic is #1 in coding because they developed it first. Then they used data + signals to train models specifically to work best with cc. They work together. Why do you think every provider (including chinese ones) have their own harnesses? Having real-world data and usage metrics helps training the models in immense ways.
Having features fast in this case >>> having perfect features. Some of them they dropped along the way, but having them in the pair cc + models is what matters. People switched from Cursor to cc in droves because it worked better there. That's not a fluke. That's how you improve your models, by collecting real world data after you launch them.
> Hell if it was so far ahead then they wouldn't be desperately trying to block OpenCode.
Typically the engineer who's reviewing PRs and fixing bugs is not the one with the "refund" button access. Someone with that access should certainly have jumped on the whole thing though.
Even if this is right, by responding to the public issue here he's taking on some level of customer support. A simple "I forwarded the refund request to the relevant team and you should hear back from them" would be a million times better than ignoring it and closing the issue.
Under Jobs, UX was king. Devices had to be intuitive, and features discoverable. Today, all that user-friendliness is gone. The devices are no longer approachable for a newbie: you have to just know how to use them.
Yep. The secret "gestures," the peek-a-boo UI, and now "transparent" UI that overlaps other junk on the screen.
It's not even consistent with itself. Example: On iOS, bring up the list of open pages in Safari; each thumbnail has an X in the corner to close it. Pretty intuitive and standard. But now bring up the list of apps running on your phone. There's nothing. No X or other affordance. Who the hell would guess he has to flip the thumbnail up off the top of the screen to quit the application? You've probably forgotten how stupid this is, but that's just complacency for hideous design setting in.
Except Jobs approved the design of that screen, which hasn't fundamentally changed since early versions of iOS (iPhoneOS). And it's that way because quitting apps isn't supposed to be something you do very often, if at all. Nowadays people clear the app history by habit, but it was really only supposed to be for misbehaving apps that were burning your battery, so having an affordance to make it easy was never the point, despite how people use it today.
Also, please stop doing this, it breaks apps. It's unnecessary and just forces your apps to cold launch every time you use them.
Steve Jobs opposed the idea of real applications on the iPhone in the first place. And Jobs also personally insisted that stuff be misspelled in the iTunes UI... if you believe the pushback in the bug report on it. So who cares if he approved another bad idea?
Quitting apps is something you need to do sometimes. And making it impossible to do, through obscurity, is stupid; as that can leave the application permanently disabled. This is not something I ever want as a developer.
Not to mention that people who don't need to quit an application won't go hunting for a way to do so, and thus the problem solves itself. That's why the vast majority of arguments for crippling things to shield users from "scary complexity" fail: Novice users will not even imagine that these functions are available, let alone go hunting for them.
And I quit apps BECAUSE I want them to "cold launch" next time. But my mom isn't ever going to do that. So rest easy: Your glass-jawed app is safe from the general public.
That's not Apple, that's just current design trends everywhere. Jobs was popularizing UX idioms for yet-new hardware to the customer. Now we live in a world where children grow up with tablets.
If you go to Google's design you're not going to see an alternative take from the same playground of design, plus or minus some glassiness, emoji, bounce, etc.
Crappy? I use MacOS everyday, and it's a goddamn delight compared to the (perfectly reasonable) experience of Windows 11 + WSL. Anything that doesn't "just work" was replaced by very thoughtfully written third party software a long time ago.
Yeah, like you I lived in Linux for years and delighted in the freedom to recompile my video driver with every upgrade, but then I had kids, and a life to live, and found that accepting some limitations of the excellent OSX was a worthwhile tradeoff. Today I couldn't tell you what I'm missing that can't be fixed with a 30s Google + `brew install`.
And complaints about default choices, or limitations with easy work arounds, on Hacker News are just weird. No one typing on this message board runs default anything.
Please share specific (legitimate) gripes and win my sympathy.
Take a photo on your iPhone and wait for it to sync on your Mac. You might get lucky and it syncs nearly immediately (which is still typically a minute or so, even if your phone and Mac are on the same network and have gigabit internet). But you won't know when. And it might not be immediate.
Both sides will tell you they're up to date. You can't force a sync. They'll be synced when Photos is ready, not you. And if that's ten minutes or more later? So be it. You'll just deal with it.
This is a very good example of a disruptive bug that destroys the ability to work. I’m making a document on my laptop and using the phone as a camera to take pictures, I am working on, now. Same WiFi, same person, same cloud, inches apart. No work.
Saying that it sucks less than the execrable mess that is Windows doesn't prove anything.
Apple appears to be chasing Microsoft down the toilet. Its exhumation of the circa-2002 "transparent" UI fad is one example, coupled with other baffling UI regressions.
Mac OS examples: Apple removed the "get new mail" button from the Mail toolbar. So all those millions of people who log into their bank accounts and are told to check their mail for 2FA are left hunting for it or simply waiting for Mail's next poll. There's no excuse for removing one of the most-used buttons from a sparsely-populated toolbar. What is driving this attack on usefulness? It used to be Jony Ive.
Then take a look at Music. Apple moved the playback controls from the empty area at the top of the screen to the bottom of the content browser, and made them "transparent." Now they overlap and blend with the thumbnails and text in the content browser.
Garbage like this is scattered all over the UI now. I needn't beat the dead horse of the hated System Preferences panel here.
Meanwhile, Spotlight still doesn't show you WHERE it found stuff, and neither does the inappropriately-named Finder. "Location" or "path" isn't even an OPTION in the column headers you can add to the results list. So you can't discriminate between identically-named files or irrelevant volumes or backups as you scan the list to find what you're looking for, or sort by location.
The removal of Launchpad is another blunder. Apple didn't even replace it with anything. So now you have no comparable way to group your applications.
"Center Stage" is a profoundly defective POS that ruins my family's weekly Zooms by randomly swooping the camera view around and cropping one of my parents out, when they're sitting side by side. Utter trash that there's no universal way to disable, shoved on all users by default without permission. That's Apple today.
> Apple appears to be chasing Microsoft down the toilet. Its exhumation of the circa-2002 "transparent" UI fad is one example, coupled with other baffling UI regressions.
Windows 11 is perfectly cromulent. I don't prefer it, but with WSL, it's like a slow almost-MacOS. The anger over the transparency is I guess personal, I genuinely don't notice it. I certainly haven't stumbled over it. (I might have changed a setting?)
> Then take a look at Music. Apple moved the playback controls from the empty area at the top of the screen to the bottom of the content browser, and made them "transparent." Now they overlap and blend with the thumbnails and text in the content browser.
I just hit Play and the music comes on. I'm not crazy about their search, but it's not that big a deal. The Podcasts app now... THAT is a complaint I can get behind. I would use something else but for the integration with the car.
> Spotlight and Launchpad
Spotlight seems good enough to me. I tried Alfred and Raycast, but never used any of the helper functionalities. Just used it to open apps and files.
I never used Launchpad. I do forget the names of apps, but I just open Applications.
I am a long time mac user and I agree with all of their points. I guess you disagree, but I am not sure why you are being dismissive. Each point is a legitimate criticism from many peoples' points of view.
I acknowledge the complaints, I love a good complaint! My issue is that these superficial, and in many cases, easily remediable annoyances add up to a "crappy OS". MacOS has to satisfy a very diverse userbase from Paris Hilton-types to grumpy Hacker News readers (but thankfully not Bank of America), and I think they do a better than decent job at it.
I don't consider the Mac's less-than-half-assed search facilities to be a superficial problem. I don't see how you can argue that a search that doesn't show WHERE it found hits is competent. Beyond that, it often just doesn't work. You can be sitting in a directory full of JPEGs and search for .jpg and get zero results. Zero.
And dismissing the asinine removal of the "get mail" button from Apple's default E-mail program because YOU don't happen to use it isn't exactly respectable, is it?
Mac OS DID satisfy a great many people; I've seen no credible (or even incredible) argument that the recent raft of faffing about with the UI has brought new users into the fold. That's the foundation of so many people's outrage over it: The changes offer no improvement and don't address any longstanding user requests. But it IS demonstrably regressive, and subjectively dated and tacky.
"Transparent" UI came and went 20 years ago for good reason.
It has been a while. And I should say when I stuck to distro-tested options, I didn't have many issues. But I always ended up installing and configuring things that ended up causing conflictions, and all too often did clean installs instead of in-place upgrades.
Cook made sure that the iPhone's battery replacement cost was so high that an upgrade would be more viable. His innovation was to extend that to MacBooks.
I think maybe part of the argument is that Apple’s closed system was a benevolent dictator-style ecosystem that was actually benevolent. Until it wasn’t.
You might find that you are in the minority though. Nothing wrong with this at all but apple makes some of the best selling products in the market place and that has largely been because of Tim Cook.
Nothing you say is in disagreement with the comment you're responding to. And yeah, Apple is doing really well, in part because of their anti competitive practices. Good for them, bad for us.
These responses talking about Apple's bottom line kind of feel like this convo:
> Cigarettes are bad, they cause cancer. Philip Morris shouldn't be selling them
> Yeah but they sell so many cigarettes! Isn't that great?
I don’t think any of the original articles complaints are wrong but I don’t agree with the thesis. They are one of the best selling device manufacturers because the product and ecosystem is so good. My point was that folks, maybe like yourself, who don’t find the ecosystem open enough or the devices repairable enough, are outliers compared to the average consumer.
Oh, it's an analogy. This is a frequently used rhetorical device where you take a similar analogous setup (maybe hypothetical) to elucidate certain aspects of a situation you're considering.
You can easily see a totally different perspective on all of these if you try a little.
> You can't repair your device.
Everything is increasingly integrated for dust/water proofing, components are integrated to reduce the power envelope and push performance. Repairability is the tradeoff.
> They're intently focused on locking you in as much as possible
All of their products and services are tightly integrated and have privileged access to hardware that would be insecure to open to 3rd parties.
> They try their best to force app developers to pay them their 30% tax, even when the devs brought the customers in from elsewhere.
If you want to list on their marketplace it's not unreasonable to expect to pay for access. We can haggle on the fairness of 30%
> They, for so long, refused to support RCS and downgraded the messaging experience with android.
As a consumer I just can't possibly be made to care about this.
> They were trying to intentionally downgrade SPAs so people again need to go through their app store.
SPAs perform poorly and eat battery life and have super heterogeneous user experiences, I don't want them on my phone.
As a consumer I like that they don't open the gates on the phone ecosystem to all of the absolute slop we see on android.
> Everything is increasingly integrated for dust/water proofing, components are integrated to reduce the power envelope and push performance. Repairability is the tradeoff.
This is a fair point. But when I hear "you can't repair your device" I also think "you can't take it to someone of your choice to repair", which is often true, too, even though that limitation is artificial - witness the Rossmans and others of the world who can absolutely repair these devices. There's a whole YouTube channel of a guy who makes ASMR videos of him doing things like removing iPhone/iPad/MBP storage and replacing it with large capacity chips.
> I also think "you can't take it to someone of your choice to repair", which is often true, too, even though that limitation is artificial
This I think is a fair enough criticism. Screen and battery replacement by 3rd party professionals should be easier. Both of these things would tackle the biggest reasons that iPhones become useless before Apple drops OS support which is quite long compared to Android OEMs.
>> They, for so long, refused to support RCS and downgraded the messaging experience with android.
>As a consumer I just can't possibly be made to care about this.
Not caring that you are not able to effectively use your *telecommunications device* with people that buy a different brand of telecommunications device is wild. Kool Aid is a helluva drug.
Who the hell gives a flying fuck about RCS? RCS is bullshit pushed by carriers praying they can get a sliver of marketshare back from Whatsapp, Telegram and Signal when it comes to text communications.
Carriers have been reduced to dumb data pipes and they haven't figured out how to live in a reality where the only thing that matters is service quality and price.
Anyone who wants to communicate cross-OS and doesn't want to use a whole separate application for it, when it should be a basic capability of the phone?
Unlike Google, Apple makes you jump through the hoops of their small business program, if it's available, before they'll drop it to 15%, otherwise you're stuck at 30.
