Moreover OpenAI says, “[Apple] now admits that Apple employees reached out to him and asked for his help to locate this information”, but the transcript they cite seems to me to show the opposite? It’s Chang Liu asking for someone to help him copy data. The part where Apple employees reach out is later and it’s not for copying data to a hard drive… it’s basically “who should I talk to about this project?” Which makes sense because when he was contacted it was after he left (so he wouldn’t have access to data)

Can someone please tell me what am I missing? None of this makes sense with what they’re saying. The fact that the lawyer emailed the wrong person is moot if they caught it and resolved it days later.

You combine your website/blog with that and you have a pretty nice setup that you own. You can even use RSS to allow people to subscribe to replies to comments, threads, a page, etc…

At any rate Lattimore's translation of Odyssey is beautiful.

The real—and the one thing you can't replicate—is data isolation.

Of course there are other benefits, but it's data isolation is the differentiator of micro-services and other types of architecture.

Basically, we've done our experiment of hyper-disposable consumerism. It was great and the world has gotten richer. But not it seems like we should parlay that benefit into transitioning into a new era of quality.

I was curious about typewriters and so I learned about them and bought a few. They're amazing devices. Much closer to writing by hand with a pen then a printer. Composition and editing happen in separate stages. You can write very fast though with perfect handwriting.

I think from doing this, and other things, I realized that software was so well designed in the past because it was built by people who grew up with better metaphors for the work humans do. Computers were made because their benefits were so enormous that it was worth trying to get them even 1/10 as close as doing real work was. That experiment has largely succeeded. The only failure is then people grew up without seeing the computer as a metaphor for the work, but as the work itself. That's why software is so poorly designed.

Just take a cork board for example. You put your stuff on it. When you want to see something you just turn your head. If you leave for the day and come back everything is still there. There's no on or off. Everything is persistent by default. Input and output are universal. You just write on stuff. You want to share a file with someone, just give it to them. Or make a copy.

I think we have forgotten how great real life was at getting stuff done. The computer was supposed to assist them and for a time it did. That is until we forgot what it was for and made it replace life altogether.

I'm really not sure how anything else could be interpreted? I think this was actually very much to people's frustration even, as Homer was often misunderstood in their eyes, e.g. Plato often expresses this sentiment.

The first is justified. The second is understandable but a case of confusing it with the first. The last two also happen, and are not justified nor understandable.

Unfortunately there is currently an excess of the first case. I think people are arguing this is a problem. It probably causes the other 3 to happen more too.

I don't want to be polemic, but I really miss those days.