djfdat
There's probably other areas where people are using LLMs where a more tailored ML solution might work better.
It's not, the the good old Cursor's (the IDE) new Git platform.
What I do now is open the HN comments, and then when I'm ready to look at the link + comments, right-click on the title and Open in Split View.
Or are you just fear mongering about unions?
Previously I was using LeaderKey: https://github.com/mikker/LeaderKey - Free, open source, no longer being actively developed.
The Dev for LeaderKey evolved that into Tuna: https://tunaformac.com/pro - One-time $49 for Pro, Free in Beta - Has a bunch of new features and is activly developed
I stopped using LeaderKey because it wasn't going to receive continued support. I stopped using Tuna because the new complexity of the main app wasn't clicking for me.
So I returned to Raycast and set shortcuts to launch apps, but it doesn't have the nesting feature that I really enjoyed from LeaderKey/Tuna.
One thing to call out on the website. I wanted to see what this looked like and how it works, but on the website it asks you to press caps lock to bring up the interface. I have Caps Lock rebound to Hyperkey, so I can't see what this looks like. Maybe add an on-screen caps lock button or add some screenshots farther down the page?
Going to give this a try as well!
Instead of: let me buy this app for a few bucks and give it a spin, its now: even if I like this app, do I want to pay for it a few bucks a month for forever?
In the example, we have a sidebar for the formatting in the newer example vs havign that in the toolbar in Lion. Was it that back then, people were more likely to configure fonts & formatting settings, and we've gradually as a society de-emphasized our formatting in word processing? Or did UI changes such as this, hiding formatting options push us towards a world where we care less about formatting? I'd like to think it's a bit of both; as the user-based broadened, you had less percentage-based people that cared so heavily about formatting, so UI changes were made to optimize for that, further pushing people in that direction.
On a different note, I want to call out just how badly the sidebar is laid out compared to the toolbar. In the Lion toolbar, there were unlabeled sections but it was pretty clear what the purpose of each group was. Then you have the sidebar, where labels are added in some places, excessive space given where uneccesary, tabs that are sectioned off from the settings they'll show/hide, collapsible sections that can also be shown/hidden, some dropdowns using up/down caret while others just use the down caret, most dropdown carets being right-aligned but not the gear one, and in the liquid glass versions, the overlay of toolbar buttons over the sidebar creating confusion.
GSD might be better right now, but will it continue to be better in the future, and are you willing to build your workflows around that bet?
That's not to say the journalists shouldn't try. Having execs pushing their probably false or at least misdirecting narrative in order to control the optics without question or consequence means that they'll continue to operate dishonestly.
You bring up a good point with snippets though, and I wonder if that would be good information to feed into the LLM for autocomplete. That snippet is helpful if you want to write on condition at a time, but say you have a dozen conditions if statements to write with that snippet. After writing one, the LLM could generate a suggestion for the other 11 conditions using that same snippet, while also taking into consideration the different types of values and what you might be checking against.
As for RAM/processing, you're not wrong there, but with specialized models, specialized hardware, and improvements in model design, the number of people working under such restricted environments where they are concerned about resource use will decrease over time, and the utility of these tools will increase. Sure a lower-tech solution works just fine, and it'll continue to work fine, but at some point the higher-tech solution will have similar levels of friction and resource use for much better utility.
For someone who don't, killer features:
- GUI settings - Regular text navigation - Just enough free AI for ffmpegging - Pretty nice theming, gruvbox + 70% opacity is chef's kiss - Command blocks are a nice - Restore sessions are nice - Input area error underlines, syntax highlighting, command suggestions
For someone who was never a big terminal user and now tries to use it occaisonally but still spends 95%+ time in GUI apps, this makes configuring, getting in, getting work done, and getting out super easy. When working on web projects, I'll usually run my apps in vscode for easier error logging & fixing workflows, and use warp for accessory things like installing packages.
It's more like hiring a chef and getting a microwave dinner.
- Multiple replies
- Edits
- Scheduled send
- Voice message
- Tapbacks
- Message history
- Message order is reliant on notification order
- Delays in the notification system could be different than the messaging system
- Opaque nature of message going from notification system -> messaging system, difficult if message is lost/not sent with no indication of why
The article states that the alert had to be changed from:
"The camera will be used to take photographs"
to
"The camera will be used to take photographs for the app that you just downloaded to take photographs for."
"Spotify, why would you like to play audio? Please notify the users that you are using the speakers to play the audio for the app they just downloaded to play audio."
If they make using third party apps a little more scary, a little more dense, consistently, people will slowly gravitate to Apple's first party apps. You can see a similar pattern for MacOS where more and more restrictions are added to opening apps downloaded from outside the App Store.
What's to prevent them from changing their mind and blocking Epic again? What if Tim Sweeney says something else to hurt Apple's feelings in the future? Apple has too much free rein over removing access to this market, and while it may be a market that Apple has made, the EU is clearly requiring Apple to open up the market for others with the only restrictions being those where the app store or the apps themselves are damaging to consumers in the marketplace.