That seems like an ad hominem attack to me, as you haven't really addressed conclusion the research points to: Why are all of the worst jobs in the industry predominantly exported to the global south?
I think it's easy to conclude that the companies can more easily exploit workers in these locations, which points to colonialism and capitalist incentives. Instead of dismissing someone's research because of guilt by association, perhaps you can explain why this is not an exploitative practice?
This is brilliant, but I can't imagine anyone wanting to spend time playing it as a game. No one in my town wants to run for mayor since it is a thankless and impossible job that pays a fraction of the cost of living here. There is no fun or joy or escapism in being hated by everyone and not being able to please anyone.
I just played it for half an hour, it's enjoyable! My budget's tidy, the beloved raccoon still has a place in the city hall, and my mayor approval is steadily- but ever so slowly- going up. Feels like old school sim city!
I'm really impressed by the quality given that it seems heavily vibe coded, I'd assumed I would encounter many issues, but I've found only minor bugs so far.
You really hit the nail on the head. I can't sign over rights to stuff I don't own. Is there a good chance that this move could blow up in Meta's face, in which the Party B's organize (or are ordered) en masse not sign the license agreement and leave Zuck without the legal ability to steal while also losing marketshare?
I think more and more people like you around the world are realizing not only how corrupt the U.S. is, but that it's power and influence are in a sharp state of decline and perhaps not worth the risk at this point.
It doesn't work because Apple prevented it from working because it threatened to shrink revenue from their app store. And that's why there are so few PWA apps and users -- who wants to develop something that they know will be broken? Yes, a lot of devs got burnt and now resent Apple for what they pulled.
Nearly every browser on the market and most desktop application are just Chrome in a ski mask. Safari and Firefox are the tiny holdouts that prevent web technology from being 100% controlled by Google.
Do the teams fully understand the code that they are committing? Are the teams reviewing each others code or are agents? When agents do all the coding, and perhaps the reviewing, and the patching what is left of the team? People lose connection to their work, and the social bonds between workers begins to erode.(1) DHH's speech seems like a weird eulogy for the entire Rails community, although many of us saw this coming several years ago.
Also, I hate native apps. FWIW most devs I know actively try to avoid them.
Most devs I know who hate native apps are either web devs trying to embed web tech into everything they touch, or they just hate Apple.
Most users don’t care. What they do care about is performance, and native is usually the easiest way to get there.
For your AI workflow questions, it depends. With or without AI, those decisions depend on the organisation’s direction, the team’s capabilities, and their preferences. Did your org have a single answer for the best programming language, framework, or workflow even before AI? There was never a single right answer to any of that.
Users absolutely care, people hate downloading random shit on their phone they don't want but are forced to.
What has always been true is that users often have no choice or voice to express their actual desires. It's not like there is a public alternative here (when there should be).
I hate native apps. There are use cases better suited to native apps but often it's just not what I want.
You have little to no control over privacy, tracking or advertising compared to the web. That's left to the original developer and there's nothing you can do about it.
You can't do things like disable autoplaying videos. Often you can't even copy text without taking a screen shot. On a phone it's also much easier to zoom random parts of the screen in a browser compared to a native app.
There are legitimate reasons to prefer the web to native apps.
Many US cities have high rates of homeownership by non-white families who bought during/after White Flight. This means that there are a lot of minority homeowners who have significant real estate equity (often inherited) but lack other assets. Now the trend is reversing and white people are moving back into city centers, often renting/buying in working-class neighborhoods that had mainly been populated by minority groups since the ‘60s (aka gentrification). Sellers want to convert real estate into cash, and buyers want relatively cheap urban real estate and have cash. So the highest turnover is going to be in majority-minority areas.
(Another factor is rezoning/redevelopment, which is also putting pressure on people in some more heavily minority neighborhoods to sell.)
All of this also explains why property tax reform is such a thorny issue in cities like New York.
People who bought during white flight are at the end of their lifetime about now. Often the inheritors are not residents
Also this real estate is usually cheap and the inheritors often want to offload it because it has spent the last few decades inhabited by an elderly person living on social security and is in need of updates and repairs.
Expressing a preference between two choices is not how I would measure what listeners want. What they should have been testing is whether the listener ends up playing the track over and over and singing along to every word of the track. I think you would end up with a very different conclusion if you measured passion and not preference. This study merely reflects what the companies want to measure.
I think it's easy to conclude that the companies can more easily exploit workers in these locations, which points to colonialism and capitalist incentives. Instead of dismissing someone's research because of guilt by association, perhaps you can explain why this is not an exploitative practice?
reply