multimoon

I hope you’re being sarcastic because if not you’re delisional to expect ECC ram in a laptop. You’re going to pile up software updates that you should absolutely reboot for long before a comic ray causes a meaningful bit flip. ECC is only worthwhile in servers and is a waste of money otherwise, especially since “pro” for laptop = prosumer device.

If you don’t reboot your laptop in years where ECC matters I’m not sure how to help you.

I think this reinforces that “vibecoding” is silly and won’t survive. It still needed immensely skilled programmers to work with it and check its output, and fix several bugs it refused to fix.

Like anything else it will be a tool to speed up a task, but never do the task on its own without supervision or someone who can already do the task themselves, since at a minimum they have to already understand how the service is to work. You might be able to get by to make things like a basic website, but tools have existed to autogenerate stuff like that for a decade.

Is it bad that I’m pleased he’s struggling to stay relevant solo? This guy is responsible for the greater majority of dumb decisions Apple made and their products got instantly better the moment his influence was gone.

I’m a dev who pays the same 30% cut for all the platforms, and I still think that’s a bit of an over optimistic view. Anything is a transaction and someone has to benefit from that transaction or there’s no money to be made and it won’t be worth doing, same reason we as devs charge for software.

Apple/google/valve/etc are providing you a service and acting as a publisher, dealing with a bunch of legal and tax crap you probably don’t want to, and providing testing/rollout/apis/libraries and a lot of other features for you to use.

You can debate all day long if the cost for their service is fair, but you certainly aren’t getting nothing.

In addition Apple obviously has a walled garden, but android has had side loading and alternative app stores since its inception and it’s still not popular, every user wants to just use a centralized place, so every dev releases on the centralized market. Forcing Apple to change their rules may be warm and fuzzy morally, it won’t change the status quo in the slightest.

As many users have also pointed out valve and steam is the last of the publisher storefronts you likely want complain about as they do a ton for the gaming community.

I’m not sure where we launched into the metaphysics of if an AI can produce an emotionally charged meaningful work, but that wasn’t part of the debate here, I recall my stance being that the AI will never get as good as the human. Since photoshop is a tool like any other, “good enough” refers to making the barrier of entry to make a given work (in this case some image) so low that anyone could buy a photoshop license and type some words into a prompt and get a result that satisfies them instead of paying an artist to use photoshop - which is where the artists understandable objection comes from.

I pay for photoshop along with the rest of the adobe suite myself, so you cannot write off my comment either while saying the rest of the paying users are “the final authority” when I am in fact a paying user.

My point is simply that with or without everyone’s consent and moral feel-goods these tools are going to exist and sticking your head in the sand pretending like that isn’t true is silly. So you may as well pick the lesser evil and back the company who at least seems to give the slightest bit of a damn of the morals involved, I certainly will.

This is I think a narrow viewpoint that assumes the AI will ever get truly as good as a human artist. Will it get good enough for most people? Probably, but if not Adobe then four others will do the same thing, and as another commenter pointed out Adobe is the only one even attempting to make AI tools ethically. I think the hate is extremely misdirected.

AI tech and tools aren’t just going to go away, and people aren’t going to just not make a tool you don’t like, so sticking your head in the sand and pretending like it will stop if you scream loud enough is not going to help, you should instead be encouraging efforts like Adobe’s to make these tools ethically.

Unpublishing the app doesn’t remove you from having to comply with address requirement.

This is exactly why when Google began requiring home addresses I just let them kill my account and refused to provide the info. It was not a dealbreaker to me anyway, I had long since moved to iOS as a developer.

I was unable to find a specific price for the model you linked in my few seconds of looking but these devices generally run in the $10,000 USD range, so I don’t think it’s achieved the “if you just want to buy it” territory yet.

I don’t think anyone is cheering this on.

I’m happy that a government is holding itself accountable, but I seriously doubt the fine will go through - and even if it does all it does is cost the taxpayer more money due to either incompetence or just malicious intent.

The European mind can’t comprehend that most Americans think EU regulations are oppressive and unnecessary. The EU can’t comply with their own regulations isn’t a good indicator. Neither is the fact that the EU still displays cookie banners on their own website, despite that being everyone’s favorite jab at American companies.

I challenge you to find another economic system that has worked in history, because it sure isn’t communism if that’s what you’re referencing. This is also aside from the fact that Europe is also a subscriber to capitalism.

America is the most successful country on this earth and we bankroll most of the rest of the world but somehow we’re always the bad guys.

As an American I’d be very happy if my tax dollars stopped getting spent on Europe.

That’s a strange take.

Installed programs are the weakest link in the security of an OS like windows - should users not use programs? Users are just as likely to download a sketchy program as a sketchy extension, is that not even more severe of a risk?

User education and better marketplace policing are the solution, not silly blanket statements like that.

Linking this to any former current or upcoming administration is just silly political bias and grandstanding. By your own admission it was already wholly ineffective.

Why? There’s quite a lot of automakers and neither of these two are in dominant positions, one is even flirting with bankruptcy.

> But you work in some capacity with loud cars. Right? Why else would you be so defensive?

Wrong again, cars - not just exhausts - have been a hobby since I was a child, like for most people fond of cars. My field of occupation is wholly unrelated to cars.

> An argument can't be had because you are not an honest debater. You have an agenda. Anyone can read this comment thread and see it. You are the problem. Not everyone else. Okay pal.

Im not sure how you can call yourself a honest debater when your solution to an annoyance was to jail people. I’m not sure what your point is here - we both have an agenda in this argument, I’m willing to listen and accept that there is examples of people that fall into the group I’m defending who create a problem, I don’t think you’re willing to listen and/or accept alternative ways of thinking as you’ve demonstrated by seemingly trying to personally attack me.

> Where do you think I live and all the people who despise people like you live. Good ol' America. Yes, the concept of freedom must be why smoking is banned in most public spaces? Why there are noise ordinances in most places. You have to be one sick puppy to think the founder's concept of freedom includes morons disturbing the people while they sleep in their homes. Here is an another concept of freedom". Freedom from unnecessary noise pollution.

The purpose of my comment beyond the pun was to point out that it was founded on reasonable laws that allowed people to do as they wish as long as it didn’t harm others - and I find it seriously doubtful that you’d even hear me driving through your neighborhood - because my car will be driving at a reasonable residential speed with the exhaust valves closed which is what almost everyone does. Since you seemingly ignored my last point I’ll remind you - making an obscene amount of noise driving down your residential road is likely still illegal under your local cities ordinance.

I’m not sure why it’s such a difficult point to convey that there are far more potentially loud and modified vehicles than you realize, and you never notice because we’re reasonable and respectful and not intentionally making noise - almost every sports car has valvetronic exhausts now and you can chose the sound output of the car with a button press that way you can enjoy it when appropriate, and silence it when not. I agree with you that if someone is being disrespectful using their car, then that is a problem the same as if a neighbor decided to mow their grass at 3am and is unrelated to the car - it all probably still violates the local noise ordinance. The law you’re asking for already exists and the problem is the person not the vehicle.

Yes - I agree with you. Some of the commenters above have conflated “an annoying person drives a straight piped mustang through my neighborhood” into “every car is bad”.

>Let me guess, you make a living modifying cars to be extremely loud. Right?

I don’t no, I work in a quiet office building.

> That must be why I specifically stated police sirens, semis, etc are fine? I've nothing against "loud" cars that have a purpose. I've something against people intentionally modifying their cars to be loud

You’re assuming that the intention of people modifying their car and/or buying one of the perfectly legal cars that comes with an above average exhaust sound output is specifically to spite and or annoy you, which it is not - the world doesn’t revolve around you. As another commenter pointed out, it’s done because they enjoy the sound for themselves and their own pleasure while driving. This is the exact behavior why this argument can’t ever be had - because we can’t ever have a discussion on “okay maybe we should set a reasonable noise cap, and you can make your car sound different and enjoy the sound if that’s your hobby, but your cap is <a reasonable number>” - you just immediately go straight to “nothing and if you do anything, straight to jail”. Thankfully I live in America which was founded based on the concept of freedom.

I’d also like to point out that the vast majority of people driving cars with exhausts (myself included) you don’t even notice because we’re driving them in a silenced mode, or just driving normally which doesn’t create enough exhaust flow to make a significant sound. The people who drive the obnoxiously loud straight piped mustang through your neighborhood at unreasonable hours give the rest of us a bad name - and that is already likely illegal in your cities local noise ordinance.

What a narrow view of the world. I’m sure that there are things that you do that others find irritating, that doesn’t mean your hobby has any less merit or value to you.

I’m also sure you’re conflating the one or two obnoxious vehicles you’ve heard into “any vehicle that I can hear at all is now bad”. As many others pointed out - motorcycles is even mostly considered a point of road safety to be loud.

The resistance you get to your argument is because instead of simply asking your neighbor to start their car quietly (most new cars have valvetronic exhausts and can do this) you immediately jump to “I want to jail another person and take away their freedom because they’ve inconvenienced me momentarily”.

All of the German automakers have this feature that they all call something different, but yes. The current NHTSA regulations prevent it from being deployed in the US, as another commenter pointed out though it seems like the NHTSA finally relented and approved it so I’d expect it to start showing up. My car already has the hardware and it’s a software switch to flip it on, so I imagine most other newer German cars are the same.

This is extremely short sighted. I’ve owned several cars that I have modified or have factory exhausts that are audible, and it’s always been purely because I enjoy the sound, but I’ve never made them obnoxious or deafening.

Car guys don’t do things to annoy other people, they do it because it brings them happiness and joy, just like anyone’s hobby does for them. Thinking that everything in the world that disturbs you was done in malice is a pretty dismal worldview.

The purpose of an exhaust is not to disturb.

I think you’re straw manning my argument, where I conceded that absolutely some people go too far and are obnoxious. The civic at 2am example is a great one, street racing late at night is another, and I agree with you that’s unnecessary.

My argument was simply that I have yet to see an implementation in proposal that stops the above, without also making the factory exhaust that’s barely above road noise level on your average sports car illegal. Where do you draw the line? How do you get people to agree on where the line is? Do you make exceptions for things like performance vehicles/supercars? You’re not going to find consensus among the population besides for most of us it’s a non-issue that nobody even thinks about.

Where you’re going to find disagreement with a significant portion of the population is if fifteen seconds of a low rumble of a car passing by is “disturbing the peace”. You cannot expect complete silence at all hours of the day, and to do so is naive.

Highways and semis create by far the most noise pollution. Dogs bark, people have parties outside, etc. The world is not a place requiring sterilization of the senses.

I’d argue the biggest offender here is Ford/GM

The German cars will at least attempt to dim the beam or auto turn off high beams, in Europe they’ll even divert the beam around you but for some reason we don’t allow that in the US. I drive a BMW as my daily and the computer makes every effort to not blind people.

GM and Ford I just get constantly blinded by gigantic pillars of LEDs, regardless if I’m driving another truck or a low sports car.

The best practice is to just not post something on the internet that you don’t intend to be archived and live forever.

I feel pretty strongly that it isn’t the place of a government to police non-critical data (read: things that aren’t financial related).

That seems like a terrible idea for government. “Well actually I meant”, and off went the goalpost into the atmosphere. If a law is so complex that you can’t effectively write it in a locked in medium then the concept of said law is probably flawed.

Nintendo just finished killing both major switch emulators.

Because it’s a poorly designed regulation and there is a group of people who can’t accept that the EU over-regulates and is bad at writing any regulation remotely related to technology.

If a government has trouble complying with the “spirit” (as many people use in argument) of their own regulation then the regulation is poorly designed and not useful.

I think this is so far off-base you aren’t even close, there is an uncountable amount of indie (or even well respected established studios) working on passion projects or working on respected titles in reasonable and relaxed working conditions. You need to recognize the occasional headline you read isn’t ever the standard and you shouldn’t stereotype it.

The EU’s own website has the same banner message asking for analytic cookies, it’s just a poorly designed and executed regulation like many in the EU revolving around tech.