This is a bizarre way of saying “if they ship it and it has reliability problems, they know they’re skating on thin ice”.

Apple’s brand has taken a beating (I’m as aghast with the latest macOS as the next nerd), but people love that when Apple ships a product, it generally works and the hardware doesn’t break.

Butterfly keyboards are a terrible stain on the hardware team’s reputation. “Scared” is the wrong word for how these things work.

Turns out people like them. Not so much the HN crowd, but c’est la vie.

For me, Antigravity is possibly the worst GUI experience I’ve had since Clippy.

It’s completely filled with arcane buttons, prompts that are effectively modal appear in at least 3 different places, it’s constantly… doing stuff, without any reference to where I should focus my attention.

I appreciate Google giving away absurdly generous quantities of tokens for FREE just to get me to use the thing, but I can’t bring myself to, because when I get into the flow of a feature with an LLM, I’m suddenly stuck and can’t figure it out.

It’s like peak Google UI for me.

Speed was its main advantage, before. It has become nearly unusable.

The price of extraordinarily rapid iteration, I suppose.

It does eventually finish its quota, but then I just switch to a different Google account (which, amusingly, is what Gemini told me to do).

Happy to consume Google’s free tokens! The free model is a distant third for coding, but it’s fine for leaf node work in a larger project.

That would be heartening, if I wasn’t consuming tokens 10x as fast as expected, and they just had attribution bugs.

Do you have references to this being documented as the actual issue, or is this just speculation?

I want to support Anthropic, but with the Codex desktop app *so much better* than Anthropic’s combined with the old “5 back and forths with Opus and your quota is gone”, it’s hard to see going back

Right now OpenAI is giving away fairly generous free credits to get people to try the macOS Codex client. And... it's quite good! Especially for free.

I've cancelled my Anthropic subscription...

People are mad about buy-borrow-die, so they’re proposing extraordinary new measures.

Personally, I’d just make capital gains taxes apply at the “borrow” stage to actually fix the problem. That would have a host of compliance issues but they’d be localized in the finance industry which already has an army of people figuring out compliance.

I would happily use local models if I could get them to perform, but they’re super slow if I bump their context window high, and I haven’t seen good orchestrators that keep context limited enough.

I would support a “5 cents per unsolicited email” email system, in a similar way. If you make it a mildly enjoyable $5/hour task to read the first sentence or two of your spam folder, the overall internet would be better.

The casting was OK, but they mangled the plot and motivations of every character nearly beyond recognition!

Netflix refuses to participate in “stuff this user watches”, it would be trivial to do, but Neflix jealously guards its viewership numbers and I expect this is the main reason they don’t do it. That and… they’d rather you just browse Netflix and not watch other services.

The “stuff this user watches” app is very useful! I like it a lot, when I’m not watching Netflix stuff! It works with every service except Netflix!

But the moment the family shifts over to watching some Netflix show, it forces us out of the habit of using the TV app, and then we go back to the annoying “spend 90 seconds trying to find what we were watching on Hulu” experience, which is worse in every way.

Everyone keeps talking past each other on this, it seems.

“Generating power in space is easy, but ejecting heat is hard!”

Yes.

“That means you’d need huge radiators!”

Yes.

OK, we’re back to “how expensive/reliable is your giant radiator with a data center attached?”

We don’t know yet, but with low launch costs, it isn’t obviously crazy.

So much criticism of space seems to fall into a few categories:

  1. They think there were ever any serious engineers who thought STS was a good idea, (rather than congressional-pork, which is what it always was), and thus assume actual space technologists are basically always wrong about the possibility of ever creating anything new and reliable
  2. They think cost/kg to LEO is somehow a physical law, and can never be improved on
  3. If they accept that SpaceX might actually have better technology that allows new things, they still refuse to wrap their heads around 2-3 orders of magnitude cost reductions due to improved technology, they update, but mentally on the order of “it will be 50% cheaper, no big deal”
  4. They just hate Elon Musk. On this one, I’m at least sympathetic

If I worked for SpaceX, I imagine I’d focus more on just getting more Starlink mass in orbit for at least 3-4 years, but after that, we might have spare capacity we might want to spend on orbital power loads like this.

Starship, at least as a rapidly reusable second stage, may fail, rockets are hard. But you aren’t really engaging with people’s dreams if you start from “we don’t have access to the technologies that appear to represent a one to two order of magnitude cost shift”.

AT&T and the baby bells were widely loathed (man I hated Ameritech…), so the idea they would extend their tentacles in this way was the main thing I reacted to. The technology seemed straightforwardly likely with Dennard scaling in full swing.

I thought it would be banks that owned the customer relationship, not telcos or Apple (or non-existent Google), but the tech was just… assume miniaturization’s plateau isn’t coming for a few decades.

Still pretty iconic/memorable, though!