Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | microtonal's commentslogin

I don't see what the issue is. The user could then select Apple (or Mistral) for strong privacy or another provider for customers that don't care.

I primarily want Apple to provide extension points so that I can select my own provider, just as I can choose where to host my mail or install another app as my instant messenger.

Sure, I could install another provider's app, but it wouldn't have the same integrations, similar to how an instant messaging app would be less useful if notifications were limited to iMessage.


If it's going to be anything like Gemini on Google Pixel, it'll be great at everything except for trivial tasks like setting timers :).

Except that he validated Trump by giving him gold trinkets and donated $1M to his inauguration.

Cook is an enabler.


That's what I meant by "seemingly".

You didn't say seemingly.

Apple not rolling out a lot of this stuff in the EU (immediately) is a feature.

if Apple went somewhere like wearable glasses with it, it'd be a hit

It would be a PR disaster, most people outside the SV bubble just find smart glasses what they really are: creepy.

Even more so because Meta is going to roll out face recognition and going to live-annotate people you encounter in the streets. Luckily that shit is not allowed in the EU.


A few things:

- A lot of people found smart watches to be nerdy, something that only geeks would wear, until Apple made the Apple Watch. Along the same lines, everyone (on tech-oriented social media) thought the AirPods looked stupid and dorky when they were first announced, but now they're ubiquitous.

- People find smart glasses from Meta (and previously, Google) creepy, but – and it's anathema to say this around certain parts of HN – like it or not, people do generally trust Apple with their data in a way that they don't with those other companies.

- It seems like you're assuming Apple's glasses would include outward-facing cameras in the first place. Do we know that? The ideal device for me would just include the downward-facing IR cameras for gesture detection. Presumably only people under NDA can say for sure right now.

> Luckily that shit is not allowed in the EU.

What's not allowed? Facial recognition, street annotation, AI? Does it make a difference if it's local, on-device AI?


People have found surveillance cameras horrible since forever. No matter how many years pass and how popular they are, they never became cool

I'm not sure that's true anymore, or at least I'd suggest it depends on the type of surveillance camera you're talking about. Flock cameras, traffic cameras, the big ugly gray things stuck on the side of a building that you'd avoid if you were playing Splinter Cell? Sure, not popular. But everyone and their grandma has a Ring doorbell or a Nest camera inside or outside of their home now.

Further, it's still not obvious to me that an Apple glasses product would be a surveillance camera in the first place.


I cannot think of anyne who said "oh good, they have a camera in this place"

I think it is more that axing the audience feedback was convenient for them. In the old WWDC keynotes they had to get the audience to 'wow' and applaud. You could very quickly see a feature sink when Apple announced features where the audience went 'meh'.

Now they completely control the narrative.

But I have only rarely heard anyone who liking the new-style presentations. It all seems fake with the same woolly business talk (everything is an 'experience' now, 'app experiences', etc.).

I certainly long back for the days where anything could happen, Jobs would work to convince the audience and Bertrand Serlet would come on and troll Microsoft.

Currently streaming the presentation, but it has mostly gone to the background as it's so insanely boring.


The audience was the only thing they couldn't control - so they got rid of the audience.

Their audience are no longer the people in the room. The audience is the people watching the video or livestream which is great because that means you don't need thousands of dollars and an invite to go to WWDC.

When the keynotes still had audiences there was also a livestream. Here, have a WWDC 2007 for kicks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubm2dYzoDW8


>I think it is more that axing the audience feedback was convenient for them. In the old WWDC keynotes they had to get the audience to 'wow' and applaud.

I feel like I'm about to tell you there is no Santa or something, but did you really not know that Apple always stuffed audiences with Apple employees? Of the remainder it both through intentional and natural selection leaned towards sycophants. Did you really think the roaring response were organic feedback?

It was always controlled. Personally I'm happy to be done with the on-cue tumultuous cheering and whooping.

>But I have only rarely heard anyone who liking the new-style presentations

Well I have only rarely heard anyone who liked the slow, plodding old-style presentation. So...

But yes, HN is overwhelming filled with angry, shakes-fist-at-clouds "it ain't like the olden days!" sorts now. So if you really think this place represents the norm...


I was in the audience at WWDC 2019 and lemme tell you, there ain't no whoopin and hollering from the paid shills in the audience that could've been louder than the massive "oooooooof lol whut" let out by 1500 people when Ternus announced the Pro Display Stand would cost $999.

> Did you really think the roaring response were organic feedback? It was always controlled. Personally I'm happy to be done with the on-cue tumultuous cheering and whooping.

While I agree with you, I think even the controlled audience mattered.

The audience, even if they were largely Apple employees + journalists, did not know what was gonna be revealed. And there weren’t literal cue cards.

So you would never see the audience boo, but there were several situations where the Apple presenters expected cheering but got polite clapping instead, or cheering which was very evidently just the sycophantic employees (or the team that worked on something).

When something was truly exciting, the cheering reflected that in a way it didn’t when the announcement wasn’t.

Two very different examples of this were the Snow Leopard reveal, where the excitement could be felt throughout the presentation, culminating with the $29 price, and the iPhone reveal with the 3 devices in 1 gimmick.


but did you really not know that Apple always stuffed audiences with Apple employees?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeqPrUmVz-o

(Aside from clearly not an Apple employee, Jobs' way of taking the question is brilliant. Yes I know this was probably not the keynote, but it's a big, risky, filmed WWDC event.)

But yes, HN is overwhelming filled with angry, shakes-fist-at-clouds "it ain't like the olden days!" sorts now. So if you really think this place represents the norm...

Yes, let's resort to personal attacks. There are a lot of things that are better now. Apple Keynotes are not one of them.


You linked to a "fireside chat" with Steve Jobs, consultant, returning to a highly dysfunctional Apple. The video is almost 30 years ago.

If that's your evidence to rebut me, lol.

>Yes, let's resort to personal attacks

You took that as a personal attack? That is incredibly weird. It was a general observation about the sort of perspectives that top HN, but not in the general world, or even general technology. You don't have to believe it.

Like seriously, currently the top post to a discussion about Apple unveiling an array of software improvements is some guy whining and bitching about the presentation, whining that it isn't like the olden days.


Well now they don't even need to convince the employees and sycophants.

For a window, it was really social, early to late 2000s (anyone in NL remember Hyves?). It was a great way for keeping up with friends as you went to different schools, when they were traveling, etc.

There were a bunch of things that destroyed it: Ajax [1], async tech made it possible to continuously push new dopamine shots when viewing a page; the rise of smartphones, since before smartphones you could only check social media when you were behind a computer, which was not true for most people most of the day; and the realization that dopamine shots + ads can bring in a lot of money.

Even though we had cell phones in the early 2000s, in most countries it was just for calling and some SMS (which was expensive outside the US). You would only go to Hyves, Myspace, or whatever when you had some time in the evening. I am sure some people got addicted, but it was much harder than having a device that tries to entice you all day to look.

That said, I still find social networks like Mastodon very useful. Not so much as a replacement for keeping up with friends/family, but it makes it very easy to discover what people who are in niches I'm interested in are up to. And since it does not have an algorithmic feed or ads, the addiction factor is much lower.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming)


I’d krabbel your HN profile if it let me. Respect!

The difference in sports culture leads to almost no talent getting wasted.

I grew up in a European (Holland) country and as boys we'd play soccer all the time, during school on the schoolyard, after school, in the evening and the vast majority of boys in my class joined the local soccer team (me included). Even though we were a local team in a small village, scouts of slightly more important teams would sometimes come to our matches.

Basically, because soccer is so ingrained in our culture, virtually all boys play soccer at some point. That combined with all the clubs that play at different levels, and the scouting network, virtually no talent is missed.

Put differently, when a new Cruyff or Robben is born, there is a high probability that he will be found.

Women's soccer is really a different story. It has only started to take off in recent years and at least as many girls seem to play hockey.

Of course, it should be said that the only sport that really matters is Korfbal/Korfball :).


I don't disagree, but it's funny that Apple's AirPort routers, which have been axed almost a decade ago, can still be configured with the AirPort app. Years ago, I temporarily hooked up an old AirPort Extreme to replace a broken router, and it even got an update (probably a security update).

At any rate, I think as much as web vs. app, IMO companies should be forced to support their appliances for a certain time period by law (the EU has rolled out a law to require this for some device types). If it was normal for a router to work for 10 years or a washing machine for 20 years, a vendor should be forced to support it for that amount of time since the last sale.


The One is nice if you want to support the OpenWrt project, but if you want raw power, the GL.iNet Flint 2 (MT6000) is a much better choice. Faster SoC, 1GB RAM, 8GB storage, one more 2.5 GBe port, twice as fast WiFi 6, and also supports vanilla OpenWrt.

I've put OpenWRT on the Flint 2, and I've had issues with connectivity that I don't have with OpenWRT on a Linksys router. I need to disconnect and reconnect every so often. I'd read that this is due to the Mediatek modem not being as well supported, but I'm not sure how to diagnose.

Have the same router (Flint 2), and had a similar issue in the past. After I configured SSIDs with different names on the radios (i.e. the SSID is either configured on radio0 or radio1, not both), I didn't encounter this anymore. YMMV, but this helped me - perhaps it'll prove useful to you as well.

And besides this issue, overall it works great. I recommend this to anyone who asks me about it.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: