Wow, that website is impressively cpu-intensive. Like, I'm on a beefy desktop processor (linux + firefox if it matters), and it's chewing through over 100% cpu and not keeping up. Just having the tab open causes my CPU fans to spin up to max.
The real million dollar homepage at least performs well.
iOS makes it painful to use third-party sync protocols and servers, like syncthing can't run in the background, a git sync service can't run in the background, only iCloud gets to run in the background.... and whatever sync protocol the app itself has blessed so it can run immediately on opening the app.
As such, on iOS the native sync is the only one that works cleanly and seamlessly, and so you're incentivized to pay for it.
There was a little while, when dropbox was big, where it seemed like the future of computing would be "your data is in the cloud, and every app you use can share that data, and those two things are independent integrated through some common filesystem layer".
And then it ended up that no, your data's in a cloud-per-service, where your emails live in googles cloud, your documents in microsoft 365's cloud, your images in "adobe creative cloud"'s cloud, your photos in Apple's cloud, your passwords in 1Password's cloud, and your knowledgebase in Obsidian's cloud.
The dream of the filesystem API being able to expand to clouds, of being able to choose dropbox or google or apple as the owner of your data, and other applications seamlessly integrating with any of them, it died with apple making it impossible to offer any sort of generic filesystem API or even background sync.
And so, that's why you'd use obsidian sync over git, because you're cursed with using a phone.
Unless you're saying "why not pay for obsidian sync, but then sync it into a git repo in CI and commit there to see the diffs", not "why not use git as the underlying sync protocol", in which case ignore everything I wrote, you totally could do that.
Which gates "sync" behind an expensive "premium" paywall.
It feels criminal to charge that much for the sync feature when it also can't possibly work, iOS actively does not want apps to run in the background, and does not offer a viable method for this libgit wrapper to execute libgit on, for example, a filesystem inotify event or write or whatever.
What do you know, people are observing it doesn't really work.
> Apple's iOS has a pluggable Files system.
Okay, excellent, maybe you can tell me how to do this.
I have opened the builtin iOS notes app. It by default can sync notes with iCloud. I would like to have it store my notes in Git or Dropbox or anything else, and be able to also edit them on another machine and have the changes sync.
I won't hold my breath on how to do this because like clearly things are not pluggable, the builtin iOS apps don't work with anything but iCloud and the filesystem is obviously not pluggable or generic.
"Why am I even here, what's the point?" is a deeply personal feeling question, so people aren't very inclined to talk about it with friends or post it on social media. I assure you some people do post about this on social media sometimes though, and I've discussed shades of that question with many friends over the years. I haven't yet met a single person who, when I asked them about why they thought they were here, hadn't already given it thought.
This question is the subject of so many poems, so many pieces of literature, so many movies, that you're forced to confront it multiple times in school, and you're forced by your very existence to confront it once you hit certain levels of mental development. You're forced to confront it many times in your life - perhaps first when you gain a theory of mind (before age 10), again when you first truly realize you will die, again when someone very close to you dies, when you propose/marry (if you do), when you have your first child (if you do), when you get a cancer diagnosis (if you do), when you consider taking your own life (if you do)... all of these common life events force you to confront it deeply.
Most people make peace with it in some form, and most realize that questioning it daily does not make a difference, you simply have to either accept an answer (whether that's "god", or "for no reason", or "I'm not sure yet, I need to check back in after I get older"), or decide that there is no simple answer, and they have to live with that.
I don't think they were talking about pwsh? pwsh actually has types and is its own programming lang unlike *sh, so it doesn't rely on builtin command exit codes.
Friday is the deadline that the secretary of defense, Hegseth, gave Anthropic for complying with the "allow the military version of claude to do mass surveillance and autonomous killing" order.
> Once you can ask your agent to change a feature and be 100% sure they won't break other features then you don't care about how the code looks like.
That bar is unreasonably high.
Right now, if I ask a senior engineer to change a feature in a mature codebase, I only have perhaps 70% certainty they won't break other features. Tests help, but only so far.
This bar only seems high because the bar in most companies is already unreasonably low. We had decades of research into functional programming, formal methods and specification languages. However, code monkey culture was cheaper and much more readily available. Enterprise software development has always been a race to the bottom, and the excitement for "vibe coding" is just the latest manifestation of its careless, thoughtless approach to programming.
> functional programming, formal methods and specification languages
Haha. Tell me you've never done professional software development without, etc. None of those things are solutions to the problem, which is: does the code do the business value it's supposed to?
There are limits how badly can such senior screw up, or more likely forget some corner case situation. And he/she is on top of their own code and whole codebase and getting better each time, changing only whats needed, reverting unnecessary changes, seeing bigger picture. That's (also) seniority.
Llm brings an illusion of that, a statistical model that may or may not hit what you need. Repeat the question twice and senior will be better at task the second time. LLM will produce simply different output, maybe.
Do you feel like you have a full control over whats happening here? Business has absolutely insatiable lust for control, and IT systems are an area of each business that C-suite always feel they have least control of.
Reproducibility and general trust is not something marginal but core of good deliveries. Just read this thread - llms have 0 of that.
But if push come to shove any other engineer can come in and debug your senior engineer code. That's why we insist on people creating easy to change code.
With auto generated code which almost no one will check or debug by hand, you want at least compiler level exactitude. Then changing "the code" is as easy as asking your code generator for new things. If people have to debug its output, then it does not help in making maintainable software unless it also generates "good" code.
> AFAIK, there is no "specification" or "protocol"
The protocol is english. You want your claw to check a hacker news comment and let you know when it gets a reply? You tell it "Check every 5 minutes if this comment has a reply", which then generates an english message to save and send to the agent each time, resulting in a browser tool invocation.
The claws live in a post-API world, where the API is english which turns into bash invocations or browser tool calls or such.
The real million dollar homepage at least performs well.
reply