Stripe isn't keeping all of that "1.5% - 3.25% + 20p", they're paying the network some portion.

Additionally, instead of using the blended pricing model you quote, they do offer IC+ pricing to (at least some) businesses. I don't know the criteria. On IC+, you're explicitly paying "whatever the network costs" + "fixed Stripe fees"

https://stripe.com/resources/more/interchange-plus-pricing-e...

> Larger and fast-growing businesses often choose interchange plus pricing because it passes through the true cost of each transaction. At high volumes, its net cost is often lower than that of blended pricing. It also gives finance teams true oversight because it shows where all the money goes. That makes it easier to forecast costs, spot inefficiencies, and negotiate or shop around for the processor markup.

It could be fun to implement a scientific notation result display for answers that would otherwise overflow, although off the top of my head I'm not sure what the cleanest way to do that is.

> Now I delegate that work to AI.

> […]

> If one day passes and nobody on the team reviews the PR, we merge it

It’s not clear to me whether or not the author is reviewing the code their agent is committing on their behalf, so maybe I shouldn’t be surprised that they don’t seem to care whether or not their team is reviewing it either.

But I am surprised. The author says they used to spend quite a lot of time writing developer guides, hopefully by building consensus among their peers. It seems to me like a big shift if it’s now a workplace where they might not even read each other’s code changes.

Or maybe the dev guides were top-down directions on the way they want the team to do things, and now AI is super compliant and they’re living the dream.

It’s not the final word, since automation has other benefits: documenting the procedure’s steps, reducing human errors, increasing consistency, etc.

1: https://xkcd.com/1205/

> How often does a restaurant update a menu? Those that need to update frequently already solved that by having a chalk board.

One advantage of a digital ordering system: it can track inventory and mark a dish as unavailable after N have been ordered.

Some restaurants might have menu updates in the middle of service quite frequently, if they have a daily special with a fixed quantity. Most restaurants probably have an unavailable dish occasionally. Or if a beverage choice becomes unavailable, or a new beer is put on tap.

I don’t think ease of menu updates would be the deciding factor for any restaurant, I think it’s more likely to be based on the experience they want their customers to have

That’d be Unicode Normalization. I don’t have an opinion on the best source for more details, so here’s a link from unicode.org https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/

I don’t know enough to know whether or not there are still Arabic-specific issues, either in the spec or the implementations.

The example in the article of copy/paste/search is interesting. I think it’s equally likely to be a RtL issue as a normalization bug, but I haven’t done anything significant with either topic.

IDK if there’s an easy way for the average person to get a live audio broadcast feed from games, so maybe your target market would be listening to that instead.

I’m thinking it could use some sound effects, for balls, strikes, hits, etc. I only tuned in for a couple pitches and then it was between innings, so maybe the more significant events already have something, and I just wasn’t patient enough to experience them.

I was looking away when the last out of the inning happened (or maybe changing views?). Is there a display of what caused the out, and maybe an animation of the fielders coming into the dugout, or does it flash up the “between innings” screen pretty quickly?

It might be nice to have a significant event summary available somewhere. It feels hard to believe that this would catch someone’s attention well enough that they’re watching the whole thing, and without audio cues / replays, I know I wouldn’t be interested in watching it for any length of time.

> Goals for Hacking for Defense

> A decade ago, our goal for the class was to teach students Lean Innovation methods while they engaged in national public service. We wanted to familiarize students with the military as a profession and help them better understand its expertise, and its role in society. We also hoped the class would show our sponsors a methodology that builds problem understanding before writing requirements.

> The class still does all this, but now that the DoW is buying from startups and defense venture capital is abundant, the class has turned into a national security incubator. Most of our teams form defense companies.

And so I think there’s a meaningful difference between the app donating all the data automatically, vs making the data available to the user who is free to share what they want.

> PCC delivers a powerful server model without compromising privacy: data is never stored, used only for the request, and independently verified. It's integrated with the OS and iCloud, so there's no authentication or API keys, no token cost to developers, a daily per-user limit (higher with iCloud+), and eligibility for apps under 2M downloads.

Source: summary on https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2026/319/

I haven’t seen any information about what’s happening with apps over 2M downloads, who graduate from the Small Business Program. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program...

I saw that. Maybe you’re unfamiliar with Apple’s Private Compute Cloud? It’s intended to allow cloud computation on data without making the data available to anyone, which I think backs up my interpretation that apple’s stance is “no one should have this data, not even us”

This is from https://security.apple.com/documentation/private-cloud-compu...

We designed Private Cloud Compute with core requirements that go beyond traditional models of cloud AI security:

* Stateless computation on personal user data: PCC must use the personal user data that it receives exclusively for the purpose of fulfilling the user’s request. User data must not be accessible after the response is returned to the user.

* Enforceable guarantees: It must be possible to constrain and analyze all the components that critically contribute to the guarantees of the overall PCC system.

* No privileged runtime access: PCC must not contain privileged interfaces that might enable Apple site reliability staff to bypass PCC privacy guarantees.

* Non-targetability: An attacker should not be able to attempt to compromise personal data that belongs to specific, targeted PCC users without attempting a broad compromise of the entire PCC system.

* Verifiable transparency: Security researchers need to be able to verify, with a high degree of confidence, that our privacy and security guarantees for PCC match our public promises.

- - - -

Second, according to their press release ([1] and a sibling comment elsewhere in this chain), they’ve been trying to find a way to allow interoperability without giving full access to everything. Unsuccessfully, so far. So it’ll be interesting to see where it goes, but I’m sympathetic to their current stance.

[1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de...

Their presentations talked about how it was based on the user’s quota, with higher quotas for iCloud+ subscribers.

One reason is that the data on a user’s phone isn’t solely owned by them. Some of it is shared with other people, or “belongs” to someone else: chat, email, shared documents, photos of people, contact information, etc.

In a corporate environment, this is more explicit: you have access to company information, so the IT department controls what apps you can install / run, because individual EEs won’t always make the best choices.

Second, I think app developers are more likely to share more data, if they know that the shared data doesn’t leave the user’s control. And that (presumably) makes the feature work better. If I’m developing an app, I’ll think twice about indexing any sensitive data, if I don’t know where it was going to end up.