elicash

It's kinda like Apple where they both benefit from and also are hurt by the fact that putting "Apple" in the name makes more people click.

Added exposure/free marketing when the news is good. But then if the Duo is having some issues with cracked screens, that'll also get more attention.

I get glass vs finish. But there's a third term being used for the new M6 MacBook Pro, which is nano-texture "display." Someone clarified that it's the same as the "glass" so I take this to just be Day 1 marketing confusion that'll hopefully get cleaned up on the buying screen.

Touch OLED laptops expected at tomorrow's event.

https://www.macrumors.com/2026/10/25/macbook-pro-with-touchs...

Nano-texture upgrade option is coming for the whole line of products.

Edit: the thing I'm confused about is it seems there are at least two but maybe three different things that they are calling "nano-texture". On buying screens, the Studio Display and iPad Mini say "Nano-texture glass" and the new MacBook Pro says "Nano-texture display." But the Duo marketing says "Nano-texture finish."

I get that the internal Duo screen has the film over it and so it says "finish," but is there a difference between "glass" and "display"?

I'm not pretending there isn't very real risk of retribution, but I do think this can be done under the protections under the NLRA so long as it's done right (as in, seek legal guidance first).

This also isn't to fault anyone who instead chooses to leave, instead.

I also think your comments diminishes the actual impact lots of folks have had, such as stopping donation to certain PACs. Relative to many other groups of workers, tech workers actually have more leverage.

My issue with "tech bro" is that men who are discriminatory or otherwise offensive often aren't well-understood as fitting into any type of bro culture at all.

Like I don't think it's true that the men in tech who work out or watch sports or whatever are worse than other men in tech. The "bro" part is kinda nonsensical.

I used a classless CSS framework once, for a project where I wanted a non-technical coworker to update an HTML file repeatedly throughout the week and then upload it to AWS/s3. I wanted it to be as simple for them as possible, to minimize errors, and it worked great.

I'm not sure what other use cases are, but it's also just true that limitations can be fun.

This comment reminds me of the "run for fun" guy in Back to the Future Part III.

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

(This isn't to say I disagree with you.)

Scroll down two inches.

Wayback Machine confirms it was there a few days ago.

People are just never happy and always going to have something to say. Even if you don't go the AI route and hire an illustrator, even if you credit work, someone has to be critical.

I'll dig more into it. I did a quick search on Yandere Simulator, and it suggests that the terrible code and assets that aren't optimized is then impacting performance of the game, that it's laggy. This person might benefit from higher quality code, no? Someone who has a talent for making games, but just can't get there technically.

I'd guess this might be one of the videos you were referring to, for others who are curious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXotP-9LcDY

The creators of indie games are never limited by their programming skills?!

This is why no code / low code is exciting. It will allow people who excel in what you call the "most important" parts to be able to create games.

Now, I don't think Google Playground is the best demonstration of this point, given it's intended to be quick turnaround. None of what's shown in the demo video is particularly thoughtful. But it still is a good indication of things to come.

Right, that's what I'm saying.

You can read about some of the claims about Gates here:

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/list-of-claims-ab...

I can imagine a scenario where the testing takes 15 years, and a scenario where the testing is done in 1 year. I think it's probably wrong to look at it purely as "we should wait X years". The author describes the 15 years as "regulatory limbo" implying that it was known as safe before that, but I have no idea whether that's the case.

In general, you have to weigh the irreversible cost of unintended consequences with the irreversible cost of known human death from mosquitoes.

This was my favorite of the genre https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtLDAkxf8Do

From your comment, I suspect you know much more about this topic than me.

But it doesn't seem from the link that they are running extra tests, just that they are charging for the secondary diagnosis. That's odd, if there's liability for not testing or treating it, isn't it?

I didn’t quote it, but they also say at the link it didn’t change treatment.

That’s why they think it’s BS

Additionally, BCBS reports that hospitals are using AI to find ways to charge more money: https://www.bcbs.com/about-us/association-news/bcbsa-analysi...

> New analysis from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) finds that hospital systems are increasingly billing patient hospital stays as more medically complex, driving nearly $1 billion in additional healthcare costs in just two years. [...]

> More than 60% of hospital systems are now using AI-enabled technologies that can scan lab results and electronic records to identify secondary diagnoses, which could move a patient into a higher-severity, higher-reimbursement billing category.

"I baked this cake on my own from scratch!"

"Oh?! You harvested and ground the wheat? You extracted the sugar? You laid the eggs?"

I have no problem with coffee shops intentionally using AI, that said...

It's also worth keeping in mind that a shop owner might google "clip art cup of coffee" and the result was created by somebody who used AI, and the shop owner wouldn't necessarily realize it. At some point, 99% of clip art available online is going to be AI.

I meant to say it was NOT how I worded it!

That might be true for them to know it was AI. Which yes, was how I worded it. But not necessarily good enough for it to be differentiated from everything else.

For example, in the Bootstrap days everything looked like Bootstrap and users got used to that, even if users hadn't specifically heard of the CSS framework.

The charts are particularly great.

I will say I'm afraid to use this style because Gemini seems to love it so much and therefore users will make assumptions about how the website was created.

Here's the context for the "abundance" reference, for those curious:

> I believe that AI could cure most major diseases in the next 5–10 years, greatly accelerate economic growth rates, create a world of abundance and empowerment, and usher in a renaissance of democracy and freedom.

Whether that matches your description of it, I'll leave for folks to decide for themselves.

This is not me putting some unrelated pet issue into this topic; to evaluate David Sack's post arguing against government regulation, it's entirely fair to examine whether he has been consistent. He hasn't. He supported a government-imposed pause on Anthropic because of his political disagreements with the CEO.

Your initial reply of "poor Anthropic" was vague, but I interpreted it as implying that we shouldn't stick to a principle given they are unsympathetic in some way.

A principled individual could dislike Anthropic and still not favor using government to punish speech.

David Sachs wants to use government to punish people he disagrees with politically, like Dario.

He supported the Department of War's illegal actions against Anthropic.

He supported the Trump administration's temporary export controls against Anthropic, the first government-imposed pause.

He has said Anthropic has created a monopoly, implying that they should be broken up.

I don't take him seriously when he says he doesn't favor government action. He favors it when he doesn't like their speech.