That's only one of the misspellings or incorrect words in this fairly short post. There are also numerous grammatical errors. Perhaps it's intentional, to show it wasn't written by AI, but I think more likely it's just sloppy and rushed. (The thinking in the piece seems as sloppy and rushed as the writing.)
Have they announced that it definitely won't be? If not, it might be just a roll-out hiccup, because Argon is available to me as an agent in Xcode and I only have a Gemini Pro subscription. (Whether or not I'll ever use Argon in Xcode is a different question. I've been so impressed by Claude that I rarely even use my Codex sub. I'll be very interested to hear from others how well Argon does with Swift and SwiftUI.)
But Microsoft and Meta are not blocking competitor tools for internal use, they're merely trying to reduce costs and divert a fraction of use to their own technologies. Microsoft and Meta are both still spending nine figures a year on Claude, and the article does not state or imply they're even considering a complete halt.
It's very unlikely that person is either new or unfamiliar with the guidelines. They almost certainly created a throwaway account specifically because they know the guidelines and want to flout them without consequences. (It seems like there has been an uptick in the number of these kinds of throwaway flame comments. I wonder if HN tracks that?)
Would you mind sharing how much it's costing you? I've been wanting to use APIs from within Intellij, but I hesitate because of uncertainty about the cost.
Junie is $30/month, and I get $35 in credits. There are times I go over the limit, and you can 'top up' in increments of $5 (min). On a busy month (for me) I may have spent and extra $40. Initially I didn't hit the limit. As it's more of a daily driver, I'm averaging an extra $20, so... maybe $50/month. Give it a shot - the CLI version made it more usable.
On a somewhat off-topic note, it seems like even the richest publications no longer employ copy editors, or not enough of them anyway. I am constantly spotting obvious and stupid errors in articles (e.g., duplicated words and misspellings) in the New York Times, Washington Post, et al. I'm certain it didn't use to be that way. (Fact-checkers also seem to have gone extinct; at least once or twice a week I'll read a news article with a glaring factual error or an absurd mathematical error.)
I see that as well. Sometimes I can see that they are prioritizing speed to print for breaking news (publishing to the web happens continuously vs the cadence of a daily newspaper) but often it is just being sloppy.
When most people are consuming _their_ news (as opposed to _the_ news) in the form of a thumbnail in an algorithmic social media feed, those copy errors matter less.
I suspect the author was thinking "homogenizing" but his brain picked pasteurizing by accident. Pasteurizing and homogenizing are both things done to milk, but homogenizing has an additional meaning of making something uniform (and more loosely it's often used to imply that you've made something generic, bland, and boring).
I believe people are downvoting this because it seems AI-generated, but this user has been posting comments/summaries exactly like this since long before ChatGPT existed.
