I find it funny that article argues SPA frameworks were pushed with cargo-cultism without evidence, while making proclamations of doom and being fairly light on substance.
I think the author has some valid points. I agree vanilla JS and SSR is a better fit for a lot of situations.
(I will admit some bias as someone who's mainly worked in Angular-Typescript)
AngularJs started gaining traction around the rise of "apps" and the iPhone.
SPA was a way to have an "app" in the browser with all the complexity that went with it. It also was a way to share an aritecture with mobile apps -- the browser is a client which calls the same public API as mobile devices.
Obviously you can call the same public API with SSR, (though it might have been more tricky before the rise of microservices), and not all webpages need to be "apps", but I think this was the argument at the time.
I think a lot has changed in 10+ years and those architectural decisions make less sense.
With static data and a form or two, SSR and vanilla JS is perfect. Resume-padding engineers might try to make it more complicated than it needs to be, but they're wrong.
I would not like to work on a complex web app with 10 other engineers that does not have some kind of component architecture.
A "fake" (as opposed to a mock) is a pretty well understood concept.
Is there a difference between a fake and a "nullable"? As far as I can tell this is a pattern for merging your fakes and reals which seems cumbersome and error prone
I kept getting promoted posts for crypto bullshit stuff, even though I consistently disliked them. I'm not sure there was a proper implementation of that feature in Twitter at all...
With Apple, definitely Apple Watch, they also leaned into Apple specific services with lots of success. Apple TV+ started a little shaky but its growing at a good clip. The new Apple TV's have been pretty successful.
Apple also shipped the M series chips, revitalized the Mac line as a result, and been giving proper attention to the iPad, finally.
Amazon has been innovating in logistics and Alexa is (was?) a genuine innovation when it came out. I think, ironically, AWS lacks a lot of innovation to pivot to more user friendliness and understand-ability, but its its still growing strong.
Google has been more flatfooted by comparison, with more product closures than successful projects, period, let alone hits.
Amazon ads - from 0 to a multi tens of billion $ business at probably a 80% margin. The reason your Amazon results are probably awful today is precisely this.
Amazon also has a more decent content strategy (eg why they bid on the NFL rights) than both Apple and Google.
Moving to a completely different architecture is a big deal, launching their own architecture is an even bigger one. I am astonished at how readily it was accepted, how well it seems to have delivered (I don't own any of their newer products yet), and how smooth the transition seems to have been for OS users and software vendors.
It's a huge deal, far more interesting than individual products like the watch or earbuds (successful though those are, they're not paradigm shifts).
AWS has added hundreds of products - they even arguably have a better hosted Kubernetes than Google Cloud does. I suspect AWS Aurora alone makes hundreds of millions of dollars a year as well.
The problem with LLM in my view is that they're capped at what already exists.
Using them for "creative" things, is that they can parrot things back in the statistically average way, or maybe attempt to echo it in an existing style.
Copilot cannot use something because it prefers it, or thinks it's better than what's common. It can only repeat what is currently popular (and will likely be self reenforced over time)
When you write prose or code you develop preferences and opinions. "Everyone does it this way, but I think X is important."
You can take your learning and create a new language or framework based on your experiences and opinions working in another.
You develop your own writing style.
LLM cuts out this chance to develop.
---
Images, prose, (maybe) code are not the result of computation.
Two different people compute the same thing they get the same answer. When I ask different people to write the same thing I get wildly different answers.
Sure ChatGPT may give different answers, but they will always be in the ChatGPT style (or parroting the style of an existing someone).
"ChatGPT will get started and I'll edit my voice into what it generated" is not how writing works.
It's difficult for me to see how a world where people are communicating back and forth with the most statistically likely manner is good
All artists of every stripe have studied other art, have practiced what has come before, and have influences. What do you think they do in art school; they copy what came before. The old masters had understudies, that learned a style. Is it not an old saying in art that ‘there is nothing original’. Everything was based on something.
Humans are also regurgitating what they ‘inputted’ to their brain. For programming, isn’t it an old joke that everyone just copy/paste's from stack overflow?
Why if an AI does it (copy paste), it is somehow now a lesser accomplishment than when a human does it.
> Why if an AI does it (copy paste), it is somehow now a lesser accomplishment than when a human does it.
Because the kind of 'art' the AI will create will end up in a Canva template; it will be clip art for the modern Powerpoint or Facebook ad. Because corporations like Canva are the only ones that will pay the fees to use these tools at scale. And all they produce is marketing detritus, which is the opposite of art.
Instead of the "Corporate Memphis" art style that's been run into the ground by every big tech company, AI will produce similarly bland, corporate-approved graphics that we'll continue to roll our eyes at.
The style can be influenced, however. It isn't unreasonable to suggest an AI that fine tunes the style of the LLM output to meet whatever metric you're after.
As far as creativity goes, human creativity is also a product of life experiences. Artistic styles are always influenced by others, etc.
They were having trouble with getting scraped. The email sign-in is enough of a barrier to stop most scrapers. https://www.404media.co/why-404-media-needs-your-email-addre...
reply