You also have so much grey area where things aren't actual illegal, such as gathering a massive amount of information on adults in the US via third party cookies and ubiquitous third party javascript.

Thats why platforms created in the internet age are much more opinionated on what API they provide to apps, much more stringent on sandboxing, and try to push software installation onto app stores which can restrict apps based on business policy, to go beyond technological and legal limitations.

That means the people who say "I can evaluate the intricacies and impacts of software authorization" have significantly fewer speciality devices to pick from, and those devices may not be worth developers (or regulators) making carve-outs to support.

For instance, if you resolve a future in the wrong context you'll still have problems - the coloring is just a compile time error that you are doing things wrong, rather than a runtime deadlock.

For instance, they are arguing that Apple is pushing users toward a Thunderbolt dock - on a computer without Thunderbolt.

There are also WebKit-based Linux browsers, which obviously do not use closed-source OS interfaces.

My pessimistic guess on reasoning is that they suspected Firefox to have more tech debt.

Not quite. It has the old behavior (grow to as large a window as supported) if the app does not support full-screen. For instance, the Settings app cannot grow wider, so it grows to full screen height.

The icon that appears when you hover over the green button reflects whether it is full screen or zoom behavior. If you hold option, you will always get zoom behavior IIRC. However, due to the green button being overridden to be a menu in Tahoe, the button icon may or may not reflect zoom/full screen behavior if you press/release option and may instead show the optional modifier on the options in the pop-up menu.

I do not believe there is a way to disable full screen behavior completely, nor spaces. However, I don't think I'd be able to survive working on a Mac without both so I haven't done a lot of investigation there.

It is not feasible that someone will use AI to tackle genuinely new software and provide a tenth of the level of guide-rails Anthropic had for this project. They were able to keep the million monkeys on their million typewriters on an extremely short leash, and able to have it do the vast majority of iteration without human intervention.

Additionally, Flash required android phones with 256MB ram as a minimum (which would have precluded two of the three shipped iPhone models at the time) and at least initially only supported software video decoding. Because of the difference in screen dimensions, resolutions and interaction models (plus the issues with embedding due to RAM limitations), the website was still basically broken whether your mobile phone had Flash or not.

My understanding (based on the timing) was always that when Adobe was finally ready to push its partners to bundle mobile Flash, Apple looked at it and decided against it. Adobe made public statements against their partner and so Jobs did so in kind.

So it is possible Apple's lawyers read this section as meaning an injunction against GPLv3 code may be infeasible to solve with licensing the patent, and instead require Apple to make changes on a time-table they would not be happy with.

Sticking to GPLv2 lets Apple control the time table it has taken to license, reimplement or remove components which had moved to GPLv3.

I can't tell you why it took them until El Capitan to remove the Emacs install though.

explicitly using vim (rather than the vi alias) is supposed to give the return code behavior you prefer.

Your work is influenced by the medium by which you work. I used to be able to tell very quickly if a website was developed in Ruby on Rails, because some approaches to solve a problem are easy and some contain dragons.

If you are coding in clay, the problem is getting turned into a problem solvable in clay.

The challenge if you are directing others (people or agents) to do the work is that you don't know if they are taking into account the properties of the clay. That may be the difference between clean code - and something which barely works and is unmaintainable.

I'd say in both cases of delegation, you are responsible for making sure the work is done correctly. And, in both cases, if you do not have personal experiences in the medium you may not be prepared to judge the work.

They are the same Info.plist format as every other MacOS application.

They do have carve outs in the agreement, such as the 'reader' exception. Newspapers I believe also fall under the 'reader' exception.

I have suspected for a while that the 15%-after-the-first-year subscription rate drop was a carve out targeted specifically at trying to retain Netflix IAP. However, Netflix was able to operate without IAP because of the "reader" exception.

Since various countries have regulated the ability to do third party payments from apps, Apple has since added API to launch said payments, to help generate statistics on use so that they can then demand third party auditing that the commissions are still being properly paid.

In the US there was a court decision that they couldn't meter or charge commission, which may very well be walked back and will lead to lots of fun future articles.

They would also be sandboxed such that the app wouldn't have access to the level of system integration it needs.