Seriously this

We need people to stop internalizing that the government and the rich somehow deserve access to private data just because they want to use it. Seeing a way to make money using enough to make you entitled to it.

Force businesses to add value if they want to exist instead of extraction or rent seeking.

"A mistake" is a far cry from criminal negligence and we shouldn't conflate them.

And accessibility.

The posts above claiming design and content are inextricably linked are probably blessed with all the standard senses.

As usual it's a bunch of folks talking past each other. Style and content together is a nice simplification when you want to conform to a particular vision. Separation is a nice abstraction if you want to enable multiple views of the same content (like a pdf version or a colorblind version or a vision impaired version) without having to change/control the content.

Like most things in this space, different tradeoffs make one better than the other in different scenarios. Taking a hard stance of "one true way" is probably missing some imagination or experience.

I think that's an original issue though.

Accessibility certainly requires a content-first approach, I agree with you there. If you view each part of an application solely in terms of what it looks like to a sighted user, it's easy to miss the subtleties of what the underlying structure ought to be.

But when you start layering on the presentation, you're still generally binding that presentation layer tightly to the current content. If you, for example, were to restructure the links in the Zen Garden footer for some reason, most of the styles would break because they're bound to the current structure of the content. The separation you talk about only exists in one direction.

By comparison, when I talk about separation and decoupling in terms of code, I mean that there is a single, explicit, and tight API that acts as a clear boundary between two units. By explicit, I mean that I've designed the units specifically so that they expose this API - this is almost exactly the opposite of what I should be doing with content and presentation, as you point out! By tight, I mean that the API is as minimal as I can make it - two units interacting via an API need to understand nothing of each other except that API, and that API is as small as possible.

None of that is happening when it comes to the interaction between content and presentation. The content is not explicit - I'm actively trying to write the content for the design, which precludes making it an explicit API surface. Nor is the content tight - again, I want to build the content without worrying about how I will layer the design on top, and I don't want to limit myself to just a small surface area here.

So to me, it makes sense to see the content and presentation as being coupled together, even if that coupling ideally goes in one direction only. And if two systems are coupled together, it makes sense to do that explicitly by co-locating those systems. Therefore, I tend to prefer systems like Tailwind that let me apply the presentation layer directly in the content layer. (In practice, I mostly prefer other tools that still let me write real CSS syntax, but Tailwind is pretty damn convenient a lot of the time.)

As an aside, talking about accessibility, I'd forgotten how inaccessible some of the Zen Garden designs are with their addition of extra content in the presentation layer alone.

Isn't that just the human problem for every possible form of government?

And therefore shouldn't be allowed to have opinions on crime and antitrust? Is that your argument?

Everybody has opinions. That doesn't mean those opinions are based on reality.

duh? why would you want someone with no experience making decisions?

She has experience in the relevant areas.

It is quite common for experience in X itself to be quite different from the experience that is useful in dealing with X in some different context.

Most oncologists have no experience with actually having cancer themselves.

A majority of aircraft mechanics are not pilots.

Only a small percentage of referees in most major professional sports leagues have every played that sport professionally themselves.

Most patent lawyers are not inventors.

I worked for Boeing designing aircraft parts. I am not a pilot. I worked at the direction of my boss, who was a pilot. He was the gatekeeper of my work.

He'd also take me up flying, and would let me try the controls a bit. I trusted and valued his pilot's judgement.

Many other engineers at Boeing were also pilots. Friends of mine are pilots. My father was a combat pilot in two wars.

Airplane mechanics have very little decision making power. They go strictly by the book. I worked on writing instructions for the mechanics who would be maintaining and checking my gearbox design. It went into excruciating detail.

I would wager that the better mechanics were ones who were pilots, as they'd know in their bones how important their job was.

I have some patents, and I worked with patent lawyers to file them. The patent lawyers didn't understand diddly squat about my inventions. They knew how to fill out the required forms, though.

Depends on if you're referring to experience defrauding the American public, or protecting the American public. That can have different answers depending on what which side of the transaction you sit.

What does experience mean? Does only private-sector experience "count?" Should we remove Alito from the bench on those grounds?

> What does experience mean?

Oh, the tiresome word definition game again. No thanks.

> Does only private-sector experience "count?"

Why did you feel the need to insert "only"?

The "you shouldn't need privacy if you aren't doing anything wrong" is such a tired yarn.

There are many many many examples of abuse, both in the short term (flock gymnastics pedophiles, cop loveint, cross state abortion suspicion tracking) and long term (the "red scare", the administration performing loyalty tests). There are also plenty of discussions outlining how everyone should support privacy because some need it more than others and we're all on the same team.

Pretending people who are against flock or government illegal surveillance care more about criminals then their families is so bad faith it makes them an asshole (not you but a comment above).

And this administration has been talking about “the enemy within” for so long, when do we see the Executive Order declaring protesters as “treasonous enemy combatants” (or similar nonsense) followed by a beefed up ICE-style militia offshoot making arrests from a Flock list of 100,000+ Americans who were tracked within the vicinity of No Kings protests. If republicans maintain control of congress, I’d give it a greater than 1% chance which is way too high.

But think of it from another angle. It's easy to assume that everyone is on board with your cause when you are in a bubble and all of your friends are. But it could be that there's no grand conspiracy to suppress the public opinion. It's just that public opinion isn't quite what you think.

And yeah, there will be bad apples. On the balance, I think these bad apples are better than the ones they replace.

The arrogance of this comment detracts from the kernel of good, which is that banks are very complicated and lots of the complication is regulatory and finance, not just software.

Don't forget ethical concerns about using things that only exist because of boatloads of criminal behavior.

Some people are tired of situations where 14 year olds get hounded for years for downloading music but altman/amodei/musk/zuck get billions and zero consequences for stealing more copyrighted content than any individual ever could in a lifetime.

oh no my torrent client broke out of its sandbox. Whoopsie! teeheehee

Seriously! What a bonkers thing to claim. "I had codex use maestro so I assume it made Android work well and idiomatically".

It's a fine project to do but clearly they put zero value on being familiar with the project's codebase/stack and ecosystem, which makes me feel fear in my heart when I imagine the first "production is down" page coming in. I already hated mobile because it's so much harder to maintain than web (and I don't do any spyware or IAP so no benefits for me there); this yolo approach would give me constant dread.

It shows that at least some software development is moving away from code and to product management instead. I'm not passing judgement on that; I actually think that's great for a lot of software. It is interesting to see the shift happening though and will be fun to see if the general quality of software noticeably changes over the next few years.

> It's a fine project to do but clearly they put zero value on being familiar with the project's codebase/stack and ecosystem,

As much as I dislike it, I think that's the future of _all_ non-critical software (think social media, crms, CI, food delivery etc). Leadership in many companies is explicitly asking employees to have multiple agents running through the day and that will lead to this.

Read this for example: https://www.uber.com/in/en/blog/efficient-software-factory/ . A very useful system, I am sure. But when you have AI at every layer from code to review to triaging, rest assured AI is the only know who knows your system. And you better hope it's not telling you that something is load bearing during an incident.

I read the article and couldn't understand it. I asked Gemini; Pareto things definitely sounds like science.

I read the article again:

- We had bugs. We let agents try to fix the bugs. True positive (fixed bug) is the F1 score. Here are the results for different models. Fixes worked 50% of the time.

- We needed to find a query. Without a knowledge graph it took 20mins, and didn't work. We used a knowledge graph. It was fast (20s), and found the right thing.

I gave my LLM my summary of the article and apparently I "hit the nail on the head".

I have no clue if I learned anything.

I answered elsewhere that I don’t personally use Android phones but we have people on our team that do. Which is why I don’t want to personally claim that it feels native.

But yes we are having real Android users test it.

So it’s quite the contrary. I care MORE what real users say. I can only guarantee that the app does things when I tap. So I’m not trusting the agent on UX, only on functionality. But whether it feels native, I am relying on those users in our team.

That's much better than my original, perhaps unfair, read. Thanks for the additional info.

I still would feel scared operating an established product off a newly changed stack the team isn't familiar with though.

Yeah that's totally fair. So am I, which is why I'm making sure we're still manually testing the hell out of it before we release it.

But our product now has a way more extensive test suite than it ever did, again, thanks to the agents writing pretty damn good tests.

> this yolo approach would give me constant dread.

When you’re completely ignorant, there’s nothing to be afraid of.

I wrote every single line of the react native app we ported, and maintained it for 9 years. So suffice to say, I'm familiar with the code.

But I am going to always prioritize the user experience over a developer (like myself)'s need for satisfaction to see code. And a pure native app is _always_ going to behave better than react native.

This gives me a chance to do that.

> And a pure native app is _always_ going to behave better than react native.

Maybe iOS is better about consistency, but I've used enough horribly made Android apps that I would not expect one that's vibe coded to behave better than a professionally made react native version.

I would if it were based on the RN version. RN is kind of okay on iOS, but really shitty on Android. Would be difficult to be _worse_.

That said, I do recommend reading the code the LLM produces whether you understand the language or not. What better time to learn?

Maybe. Android might still be a mess, fair point.

>So suffice to say, I'm familiar with the code.

You are familiar with the React Native code, you are not familiar with the Swift or Kotlin code, and likely nobody on your team is, since the AI wrote all of it for you.

First “production is down” page means you just tell codex production is down and to fix it.

Presumably a sarcastic post, but this is actually going to be how things are done soon. I had a box that OOMed and needed to be rebooted every few weeks. It was a disaster recovery standby box so figuring out what was going on never rose to the top of my priority list. So I asked Claude to dig into it (proxying the commands it wanted to run through me) and in an hour it had diagnosed the problem, fixed it, and taught me a bunch about memory usage in our system on modern kernels.

Not sarcastic. I have a moderately successful app and I haven’t once looked at the code (though I am capable, so far atleast). The only time I open Xcode is if I have to modify signing certificates. I did set up a slack workflow with a “fix it” button that basically tells Codex to fix the issue, run comprehensive tests, manually UI test for that particular issue with computer use and then deploy it.

Equal parts very cool and very scary to me

It is. For my day job, I’m a software engineering director and I probably won’t have a job in under five years. For low to medium complexity apps, even Codex before Astra was capable of doing it completely by itself from scratch. For testing I would bring up the app after each atomic change and then manually try it out. I also use my own app heavily multiple times a day and I have found dozens of issues but I just ask Codex to fix it on the spot.

I didn't downvote but I'd expect downvotes for a completely unnuanced thought terminating cliche that ignores everything in the thread. AI fanaticism doesn't help but lots of people don't get downvoted for that alone.