concinds

> Am I getting old?

I think so.

I don't know where this "ownership" debate came from. My ownership of my machine depends on strict, broad + fine grained control over what third-party devs (who are not me) get to do with my machine. Our interests are incompatible and hostile, in an era where most "native apps" ship analytics and marketing SDKs, or are videcoded. If macOS didn't offer these controls I would run every apps in a browser where it's sandboxed. This isn't the 90s.

This change is a reaction to a viral story from a tech reporter who shipped all his texts to Meta without meaning to, which tells you there's a consent and transparency issue for nontechnical users. I don't think anyone in the industry has figured out a proper solution. Unless you never interact with nontechnical people, it impacts your privacy indirectly no matter what you do. Though as technical user I hope we can get more fine-grained control and auditing.

> "I have a folder open in the Dock. If I click on another folder, shouldn't that then open?" Yes, and it does.

Look at their gif carefully. Enable Dock magnification, click one folder, then click on any part of another folder's icon for which the click/cursor would no longer be on that folder's hitbox after the magnification effect moves to center that folder.

I wonder what the revenue funnel is for this BS. Are people doing it because they're bored?

> The model is just a powerless token generator without a harness.

Which is why real-world deployments will have harnesses, and of course no full air gap. People want to use it to do things. Now what?

It's the oldest unsolved problem of the internet: how to attract high-value people and keep out low-value contributors.

You're enraged by a popup that asks if you want to restore your tabs, given that it just crashed?

The speech to text is on the phone and the summary is on Apple's cloud.

Chrome asks whether to reopen windows if it didn't exit normally. Safari appears to just YOLO it. Don't know about Firefox.

It is "recorded" by the Apple Watch's microphone, "stored" in the Watch's Secure Exclave, transferred and "stored" in the paired iPhone's Secure Exclave where it is transcribed, then trimmed of fluff words, then uploaded to Private Cloud Compute for summarization and trimming "sensitive info", then back down to the phone, and then deleted off both Secure Exclaves. The summary is synced through iCloud to the Siri app on all your devices, is "stored" for a week, and can be saved permanently.

Apple's marketing screenshots show "Always On - Listen for conversations all day" as one of the four main options when you first turn it on.

Wanted to add: the Watch has been off my wrist since the announcement, will be sold this week.

Same. I hope Apple doesn't kill AirPods for me the same way they just did the Apple Watch. I like those.

I don't believe it. Photography was invented by non-Big Tech, and was widely popular and useful before Big Tech adopted it.

Miniature cameras on your body, and summaries of every conversation you have which you can store permanently, are concepts from either spy movies or weird sci-fi. I think it's a big mistake to see this as a continuation and not as a very different trend.

We may have to accept that Big Tech people are weird and cannot be trusted with any of this. See the Valley people now feeding all their personal conversations to agents. They are creepy and they are creating products in their own image.

Friction makes all the difference. Google used to sweat over 100ms in page loading.

Running a voice memory all day long is one thing. Pressing a button that automatically summarizes every conversation you'll ever have is a step change.

They're already doing that on reddit. Fanboyism is so dangerous. No one should be that emotionally invested in a corporation, it lets them get away with anything.

His issue is more nuanced than that. Most of the value was in humans reaching new insights or new math during failed attempts to solve these problems, whereas AI is basically "too efficient" in beelining to the goal and discards potential new insights reached along the way. I assume this is solvable.

Their own claim is that they wanted Buckmaster without Alpöge to lead a rewrite of OpenAI's Navier-Stokes work, not of Alpöge-Buckmaster's Euler work.

No one can know if that's correct without proof but I don't know how you're reading it so differently.

The answer would be more obvious if you used the active voice instead of the passive voice, one of the basic requirements of clear thinking.

> Why did the White House force Anthropic to remove their model from access for any non-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape out of their "sandbox environment" and the White House has expressed seemingly no desire to block the upcoming Astra rollout?

Which would make the article's subjects "weirdly aggressive nerds who are incapable of nuance, and insist that" a non-astronomical definition be used in an astronomical context.

I've got nothing against DHH or AI. I just don't think vibe coding works well for systems of this scale.

A few days ago someone found they were flowing USB descriptors straight into the shell.

https://github.com/omacom/omarchy/commit/9285b19d6a72eba3df8...

Don't use vibecoded distros. It doesn't matter whether they fix this or that, or whether you care about a particular vuln. This is not sensible. It's why you switched away from Windows in the first place, remember?

I don't see what this has to do with the topic, sorry.

With both Firefox and Chromium using jxl-rs (Rust-based), I wonder what Apple will do about the libjxl (C++) they already shipped. I know they're doing some memory-safety with Swift, but are they shipping any Rust in their platforms so far? I also wonder if anyone's done benchmark comparisons between both libs.

--

Also, I was under the impression that after backtracking, Chromium was relying on Mozilla to come up with a Rust port, but it seems it was the reverse. Good on Google Research.

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/08/intent-to-ship-jpeg-xl/

> So, we laid down a challenge to the JPEG XL team at Google Research: Build a safe, performant, compact, and compatible JPEG XL decoder in Rust, and we’ll ship it. That challenge was met; Google Research built jxl-rs, and it’s the core of our JPEG XL support in Firefox.

Apple never treated its own apps better, despite the ad industry astroturfing BS. ATT blocks "cross-company tracking" (selling your data to a thousand "partners"), which Apple didn't do in the first place. Apple and third-parties followed the same rules. But "regulators" take issue with that:

> In contrast, Apple’s own personalised advertising is subject to different conditions. Apple itself does not use the IDFA and cross-company data combination, but draws on user data from its own ecosystem – a wealth of data that is not available, in particular, to the large number of smaller app publishers.

In other words, third-parties selling your data to anyone can make up for that. I was surprised by how pro-advertising their whole press release is, you would think they wouldn't give away the game like that.

There is no objective or tangible reason you must give up at that stage. We all run untrusted code on our machines, whether it's third-party apps or visiting websites.

> If someone or something is executing code on your machine, you have already lost

This nonsensical attitude is thankfully dying out in favor of more sophisticated approaches.

> split Chrome into a separate business

Bought by whom? Another monopolist bigcorp that surely won't care to monetize it? That is not how you reason about antitrust issues.

The Firefox-Bing experiment proved that the amount of search engines the "free market" can sustain is one (1). You won't get more without proactive government interference and proper legislation. Meanwhile Firefox loses funding.

"Nibbling at the edges" is what the competition authorities are proposing.

Judge Mehta's reasoning is obviously correct.

> US federal and state competition authorities recently asked the court of appeals to overturn the part of Mehta’s ruling that permits these payments.

You get the "competition authorities" you pay for. Decades of government-bashing, bureaucrat-bashing, sidelining and shit pay give you this level of institutional competence.

But they're strictly sandboxed and won't muck up my local filesystem.

They replaced a pretty decent native Swift Mac app (with only some chronic state management bugs), weighing ~100MB ish, with the Codex app that most people don't need, made in Electron, which takes minimum 5GB+ including filesystem cruft. Today I ran into a memory leak that froze the app and made the Renderer process take 5GB, then 10GB of RAM.

That was after I asked it to only touch 3 text files in its working directory, after which it sparked macOS permission prompts to access my Desktop, Documents, Downloads, and other apps' data. Thank god for the web platform and web apps.