Isn't this more "adding a connection to the AI compute cluster" more accurate than "adding AI to the glasses"?

California brings water from a lot farther than that -- the Aqueduct runs about 500 miles to service Los Angeles. (And has turned the formerly-lush Owens Valley into a desert.)

Destroying the first dam was environmentally catastrophic, and produced a massive fish kill. Ooops.

https://californiaglobe.com/ar...

Automotive was already at 35nm a few years ago, so getting something as large as 90nm is probably actually difficult.

Incidentally, you probably prefer larger process nodes for critical systems anyway - the smaller nodes are way more susceptible to SEUs, "strange" hardware effects, crosstalk, and side-channel issues because the useful electric fields are now quite difficult to confine to a single transistor.

Gross Profit.

Remember that tear-down and rebuild also includes profit. Nothing is sold "at cost" unless it's for inventory clear-out or other disposition.

Note I said "gross profit" not net, because if you're a homebuilder, you have to use that profit from a house to pay salaries etc. If you pay yourself say $30k per house built assuming you build 3 houses per year, you might price the house so you make $45k per house, so that if your demand changes, you have a delay, a spike in input costs, you can still pay yourself $90k/year on average.

And this isn't even "greedy profit seeking" this is just "making sure you have a going concern." I wish more people actually tried to run a business... they would quickly see that selling things "at cost" means you go out of business rapidly.

I don't know how much "helping" tools like this give in the long run. I mean it's a voice-activated search that can look up trivia. It reads stuff and summarizes it so you don't have to exercise your own brain cells. It tells you if food is healthy or not, so you don't have to think about it.

The only thing that is actually helpful is the translation. Even that, though, while helpful, basically removes any responsibility for the individual to actually have to put forth any effort to try and learn a different culture's language.

Nobody is going to have to think with these things, and they are going to lose the ability to reason about what is a correct answer versus just some propaganda answer. I mean if the AI is summarizing things, and we just take it for Truth, is that where we want to be?

That's why I suggested it's the lesser of the percent of revenue or $0.50. If it's a truly free app, they'd pay the $0 x 30%. You'd only switch to the $0.50 fee if your revenue per install was $1.67 or higher.

Free apps - just the $100 dev fee.

Thing is, small developers benefitted massively from the $100+15/30% scheme, because their price of entry to a massive market was really small.

It's only the big players that are complaining about that structure.

If I were Apple, I would have just said "ok, 15/30% including subscription and in-app purchases or $0.50 per install, whichever is less." This way the "viral free app" author doesn't get demolished, but the Epic and Spotify and Meta and whoever don't get a free ride with the mere $100 plus hardware costs per developer. Seems like a reasonable compromise, but I'm not an Apple C-suite or board member.

That Java one didn't sound like a bug so much as a disagreement about what the proper response to a user-space application accessing unmapped memory should be.

It sounds like Java was using undefined platform-specific behavior (undefined as in, not specified in a document saying that is the intentional behavior) - unless it's common for user-space apps to treat invalid memory accesses as recoverable?

To me it sounds like a security issue - if an app can just start trying to access memory, it can get side-channel information if it can recover instead of getting killed.

Inconvenient? Sure. Annoying because release notes never contain that kind of detail? Absolutely. Bug? Depends on if the change was intentional or not.

That said - the deletion of information on iCloud absolutely sounds like a severe bug, and I don't understand why processes weren't followed to check before it was released. It's just sad - where's the engineering diligence?

I've worked on and delivered at least a dozen "waterfall" projects - and just like any other development model, there's no such thing as "pure" waterfall.

"Iterative waterfall" is a practical reality. I don't know why people aren't aware of this? Is it just not common knowledge? Is there just tribal stigma? Basically there's a lot of advantage to having just enough waterfall with just enough iterative/agile. Going all-in either way is generally problematic.

The counterargument is that if you're writing code before you're designing the solution, you're setting yourself up for trouble.

Why is it that every other engineering discipline designs their product first, then builds it, but software seems to have this idea of building it first?

Sure this is a reductionist observation, but my experience is that probably 80% of software problems are due to "write code first" instead of "think about it and design it first, then implement the design in code."

There's definitely a continuum of prototype vs design. Both a benefit and detriment of software is that it allows very cheap "prototyping" - the problem is the prototype is often then shipped as the product.

No other industry tends to ship prototypes to end customers, because prototypes are not robust.

I don't know why so many software folks - and software management in particular - are afraid of engineering discipline.

The dollar amount of that minimum wage doesn't matter. The question is - how many hours of labor at minimum wage (after taxes) does it take to cover rent? How many hours of labor at minimum wage (again, after taxes) does it take to cover food?

More difficult to factor is things like, probability of losing your home, ease of going on vacations, ease of changing homes or changing jobs, availability of transportation, flexibility of transportation (is it on a public transit schedule, or is it "personal" travel?), fraction of time spent on leisure versus getting necessities, education, local population diversity and acceptance of others versus insular/fear behavior, and those other things that are really difficult to cast in terms of wage because they often depend on personal preferences or have a large subjective element.

Apparently they were using some kind of expansion. I don't know why you'd need that much more (10x !?) than 105 terabytes to store 105 trillion digits, and that's if you're storing each base-10 digit using 8 bits, which is already an "expansion".

I think what Sweeny is missing is that the 30% (or whatever) commission makes for very low barriers to entry. Instead of having to come up with some large initial risk, you can release an app on any of these "high priced" storefronts with basically zero (a couple hundred bucks maybe?) for 30% of gross.

This is really reasonable for a small enterprise compared to traditional markets, which require a significant at-risk investment for initial sales.

I think what Sweeny's complaining about is that the 30% (or 15%) is actually painful for the big players, not the small ones.

I don't know why he thinks the commission for access to a market should drop to the marginal cost of bandwidth and transaction fees; this neglects the fact that there is added value in the network effect provided by the stores, so of course the fees would not drop to merely the "cost".

Also even using his example - 25% gross margin, which he says is infeasible, is still pretty damn good in most industries. If you can't run a business on 25% gross margin, you've got serious problems.

This is the one thing I don't like about the DMA: it is "limited" by market cap and the subjective definition of "gatekeeper."

Make the DMA apply to Epic itself; make it apply to XBox, Sony, and Nintendo; make it apply to Steam; make it apply to every auto manufacturer; make it apply to every PC out there (I should be able to put whatever BIOS I want on it), make it apply to any phone (why am I locked into the phone vendor's firmware?) make it apply to any manufacturer of electronics that "locks" your ability to change its software. TVs, appliances, the works.

All that, but I suspect the real issue is that freight is a lot more profitable in that hold than is baggage, so they're trying to reduce the amount of baggage by charging it out of existence.