I know everyone makes the same joke regarding AI not being able to do it. And whoever works at the edge of any field knows that the sort of large projects required to be implemented cannot simply be asked a swarm of agents to code, some things are, and will stay out of reach for a while, maybe forever.


But, could any generous soul explain some specifics about the sort of things that make it that hard? What are the challenges there? Is it the amount of code required to be translated? The secrecy of the internals of CUDA? Is it how undeveloped the other platform is? Or maybe how different the abstractions are on each side? Or maybe something I have not though about. Please explain for those of use that don't do any GPU coding.

Forcing consumers to pay for a one month subscription to watch a one day event is just wrong. People want to be able to pay for one event or one day, they could simply price it correctly and charge for that type of subscription themselves. I think the real issue is that a large amount of people pay each month for several subscriptions they dont use. They dont want to lose that kind of consumers.

I agreed with this post a lot, but I don't think that prison threat is the solution. It might be much harder than just the jail threat for CEOs. Actually I can easily think about a horrific bureaucracy with lawyers everywhere overseeing programmers to cover their bosses' asses.

I'm not sure what can be done about it. You need to promote a culture of people producing things they want to feel proud about. When you don't have that, it's hard to legislate bad quality away.

I'd love to understand where does the love for a company comes from for people like you. Like you start defending them even before getting the fact. - They did break their own rules, just not the rule regarding in-app purchase, but the rule regarding links to external websites. - It does matter, even if it is their platform. There are reasons to fight against monopolies and monopsonies, and somehow apple is both things at the same time, so it cannot simply make any rule it wants. Also, it would be nice to have a clear an extensive list on things that apple forces developers to do (or not to do) and that they are not required for themselves. Top of my head we have: - When you get a 1-month free subscription to a service, you can cancel the same day if you want, but still keep the full free-period subscription. But if you cancel the free subscription to apple TV or apple Music, you lose the service immediately, you cannot set the phone to cancel the day before the renewal. - Apps icons movement: they have apps like the clock with an icon that changes every second, and you simply cannot replicate this as a developer. - Everything related to what you can do with airpods and you cannot do with any other brand (not owned by apple) of headphones/earphones. If they actually said "we do all this to get more profit from the iphone" I would be Ok with their decisions, at least they would be honest. But they will either not give any explanation, or say they do it for "security reasons" without more details, and it should bother all of us.

Yeah, useless, nobody has ever find uses for Wine...

There are so many reasons for not installing Windows. Can't you think of even one?

Why Open Source is relevant here? Companies providing software also stop doing it sometimes. Sometimes they go broke, sometimes they find a more lucrative use of their resources to maintain a product. Any project requiring maintenance will put you at the mercy of their maintainers to have an "up to date" software. If you believe that a project is less likely to keep existing because it is maintained by spare time and attention of hobbyists instead of companies, you need to provide evidence for that. One example of a dying project is not enough.

These might not be in the hall of fame, but they definitely deserve mentioning: - Kindle: It used to have a battery that lasted a lot, regardless you had it connected to internet. Now, even if you don't use it, it does not last a week without depleting the battery. But if you set it in plane mode, in still last months, so it clearly is a software issue related to how often does it call home. - Twitter/X: I know social media is mentioned in the hall, but the decline of twitter is so much more clear and has several problems specific to that platform: Bots takeover, app crashes very often, videos randomly don't load, you don't see most relevant replies first but the replies from paying users, trending topic are useless now, and it is ven hard to recognize parody accounts from real ones (although they recently changed something related to it). - Online Newspapers: You used to be able to read the news for free just watching some ads. If someone shared an opinion over an article or opinion column, you could go to the source and check if it was supported. Also, you could read several news sources and compare info. Now you would need a subscription to each of them. - iMacs: They used to be able to be used as monitors, and suddenly they just remove that option. Before, when the computer was too old for new software, you could keep using it for years or more as a very good quality monitor. Now it becomes a piece of garbage ewaste, with all the capabilities to be an incredible monitor. - Notification ads on apps that you have to keep notifications on. They are just the worst.

Not the same:
Word Features Comparison: Web vs Desktop
Differences Between Using a Workbook in the Browser and in Excel

The benefits of Linux for most companies are saving peanuts in Windows licenses, and any additional complications they will have from not using Desktop Excel/Word/PPT will be much more costly.

I really don't understand what the word inventory is doing here. Is there like one official list of all things in the globe and someone just updated a new version?

Is it supposed to be general knowledge what a "global inventory" is?

He wasnâ(TM)t been pedantic. Academia is done by academics (university professors), reporting (call it scientific or science reporting) is done by journalist in media (usually without science knowledge)

The notion that all people must work at their max capacity is just wrong. There are several systems and contexts where people are working to their max capacity and they are being very unhappy. Why should this be an end in itself? The fact that capitalism works only means that it is capable of sustain itself over time.

Something about this story is so relatable for many different situations we live everyday.

20 years trying to close skype in the X in windows, it still only minimizes

Regarding the "against competition" statement, I don't have proof, just an opinion man.

My opinion is that Apple has a dominant position in the smartphone market in the USA, and is close to a monopoly in the high-income segment. Their decision not to join a standard to message between people regardless of their phone brand keeps them safe from people changing phone brand, because they will have a worse experience communicating with all. They don't have to compete in having better phones or better user experience to keep that market for themselves, and for me that is a decision against competition.

If you tell me that Apple is proposing any alternative that allows people to communicate between them in a modern way, I could believe that they are just against Google defining protocols for their own interests. But they are not arguing that, they are just doing what is best for business.

Finally, if you need proof that Apple is not against globalization, you must be brainwashed. Just look at the world.