These are the people writing React monstrosities for government benefit websites, and testing them on fast iPhones and fast 4G, without realizing that every page load for actual users will take 30 seconds on their old $200 Android on 3G, and users won’t complete the form.

It’s a culture of not giving a shit, that’s the deeper issue.

I don’t know why the EU allowed Apple to intermediate other browser engines with BrowserEngineKit, which is unacceptable, while blocking it here where it is reasonable.

Recently there was an Anki vulnerability that gave any website access to any local files. On Windows or Linux this would be deadly. On macOS, Anki can't access my desktop or documents or Chrome storage or password manager storage. I think Apple's been smart about which security features it prioritizes.

Since mid-April Chrome showed 302 vulnerabilities patched, 225 of them found by Google. Same period last year was 19 vulnerabilities. They've also become more transparent recently, disclosing vulnerabilities found internally, not just externally (which Apple still doesn't appear to do). From the outside, it's hard to tell if Apple has deployed this tooling as much as Google.

But over the next 5 years I expect a growth in Blender-like open-source projects aiming to take on the big closed-source elephants. Code is cheaper now. The main downside of LLM coding, unmaintainable spaghetti code, can be mitigated effectively with discipline and coordination.

You still need maintainers to uphold contribution standards, but people will throw tokens at you. A small, disciplined team can go a long way, make a decent enough product, and then attract the institutional money (like Blender did) and hit that growth curve where everyone rallies you and you've won.

Lots of companies would have a vested interest in reducing these dependencies to Adobe et al., or have a more customizable product. Competitive professional tools, more like Blender and less like GIMP, but in other areas, like DAWs, CADs, and others.

Staying on hold for you. Google Lens on that coat or bag. Warning you in the middle of a text convo with a stranger, if the conversation veers into typical scam patterns. Better text/email spam detection than Apple. Hanging up spoofed calls posing as your bank. Magic Cue. Magic Eraser. Better transcriptions and translations, in far more languages.

And who could forget, a good touchscreen keyboard. Those are real "AI as a feature". Not a better Siri.

This is true in America in many industries now, but most of the rest of the world (even the rest of the OECD) is still far behind.

But I don't think the voice problem is surmountable. I closed their image editing demo when I saw it required a mic.

It would be appealing as a Spotlight-like text pop-up interface where you type instructions, which would work in social/office environments, but that might only appeal to power users.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48015167

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

https://x.com/AISecurityInst/status/2049868227740565890

I'm sure their marketing department is ecstatic but you guys are far more hype-based than what you're calling out.

In theory it's useful. If devs can rely on local models, it's more private and decentralized, they don't need to funnel money to AWS or Anthropic. There are low-stakes use cases that only make sense if they're local (available offline) and free.

But in practice I've seen zero adoption of Apple Foundation Models in native apps. I wonder if any Mac/iOS devs have anything to share on this.

I would not want to run any code on my machines made by people who think like this. And I'm pro-Rust. Rust is only "more secure" all else being equal. But all else is not equal.

A rewrite necessarily has orders of magnitude more bugs and vulnerabilities than a decades-old well-maintained codebase, so the security argument was only valid for a long-term transition, not a rushed one. And the people downplaying user impact post-rollout, arguing that "this is how we'll surface bugs", and "the old coreutils didn't have proper test cases anyway" are so irresponsible. Users are not lab rats. Maintainers have a moral responsibility to not harm users' systems' reliability (I know that's a minority opinion these days). Their reasoning was flawed, and their values were wrong.

Is that really so? It's a get-rich-quick scheme and absolutely no one is under any illusions otherwise, including the people gambling their rent money. They know it's a very long shot and that most people don't make bank, but they hope it'll go different for them.

WallStreetBets, just another form of gambling, is filled with posts of people losing everything but it doesn't seem to stop newbies.

The gap between troubled/problem/addicted and "desperate" has to be paper thin, if it exists at all.

What was I looking at?