Max-Limelihood

I don't think Google gets a free pass--kind of the opposite, it gets the lion's share of the criticism (especially for privacy stuff) despite being the most open and up front about what they're doing, since they open source most of their operating system.

I don't think there's any company that's done more to support transparent open-source software except Red Hat. Hell, in true Google style, they've built not one, not two, but four separate FOSS operating systems (Android, ChromiumOS, Fuchsia, and at this point it's time to admit Chromium itself has become an OS-within-an-OS), as well as being the second-biggest contributor to Linux.

I don't think Google gets a free pass--kind of the opposite, it gets the lion's share of the criticism (especially for privacy stuff) despite being the most open and up front about what they're doing. (If you want to know what data Chromeium is collecting, just check the source!)

I don't think there's any company that's done more to support transparent open-source software except Red Hat. Hell, in true Google style, they've built not one, not two, but four separate FOSS operating systems (Android, ChromiumOS, Fuchsia, and at this point it's time to admit Chrome has become an OS-within-an-OS), as well as being the second-biggest contributor to Linux.

Of course it will be gamed. Everything can be gamed. Like you said, search engines are also gamed; that doesn't mean I refuse to use search engines.

Yes, because I don't shower in Google. Why would you want to see less relevant ads?

Android and Chromium are literally open-source my guy. Google is the biggest contributor to the Linux kernel.

Yes, Chromebooks are easy to administer but very limited (you can't run much outside the browser). It sounds like Google's trying to fix that and make a full Desktop OS.

It’s bad that this is against the TOS in the first place, and reeks of anticompetitive behavior. Why does Anthropic care what frontend I use as long as I pay for their model?

But why do they want to control that? It’s none of their business.

Huge benefits: the ability to run any website as an app (dramatically cutting back on development costs and allowing us to finally replace Electron with PWAs), 30% cheaper apps (no Apple tax), ad-blocking, and better performance since WebKit will finally have some real competition.

1) Apple loves USB-C Sure, that's why they refused to adopt it for almost a decade after it became the standard and fought the EU regulation tooth-and-nail.

I don’t think one company should own all the stuff that Google does. It gives them way too many perverse incentives over the web.

Does it? It might give them perverse incentives in some cases, but in others it perfectly aligns their incentives by letting them internalize their externalities. The whole selling point of Chrome to executives, and the reason it's introduced so many nice features, is that consolidating means they have an incentive to invest in things that make their websites work better (a better Chrome means a better Google/Gmail/YouTube/Drive).

I think they might be, but only as long as it stays open-source (assuming we mean it works on Chromium and not Chrome). Honestly, I fundamentally don't have a problem with an open-source browser having a monopoly, because the open-source nature means that if things get bad you can always just fork it and make something better.

It's amazing how you can literally start a nonprofit to code a billion-dollar browser, give it away for free, and let people modify it however they want and then HN users will still find a way to act like this is being evil and exploitative. It's as if they care more about whining than they do about their supposed open-source principles.

I lost thousands of conversations I'd had back in the move from "Bing" to "Copilot". Moved straight to Claude and never touched a GPT again.

Aluminum isn't an OS, it's a project to replace ChromeOS with Android.

You still can.

"They want optionally having control" sounds like Linux to be honest; do you want GNOME (no control) or KDE (unnecessary knobs on everything else)?

You can disable these if you don't want them, and if you do, then "Come to Linux, we're missing important features" is not going to be a winning pitch.

PopOS is great, but I wouldn't recommend it right now while the new DE is in beta.

God bless you sir.

Yeah, Apple is well-known for being completely insane on this kind of stuff—whenever someone builds an app for this, Apple immediately sets about hunting down and banning iMessage users they suspect of using it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38646903 https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/21/doj-calls-out-apple-for-br... https://www.wired.com/story/beeper-apple-imessage-fight/

They're not, and I think you should trust whoever told you that even less now.

Chrome telemetry underreports a lot of use cases Sure; in that case, I would suggest to the people with those use cases that they should stop switching off telemetry. Everyone on HN seems to forget telemetry isn't there for shits and giggles, it's there to help improve a product. If you refuse to help improve the product, don't expect a company to improve the product for you, for free.

That's why I use C to write all my shell scripts. Can't have something non-portable like bash, which is missing from 75% of computers by default.

(Seriously, what am I missing here? Is `apt-brew pacman install fish` really that hard to type? If cross-platform portability is actually a concern, shouldn't you be using Python anyway?)

You shouldn't be writing serious programs in Bash/Zsh at all, is the issue. If it's complex enough to need linting, it's complex enough to require Python/Perl.

I'mma be honest, I think the API is great—EXCEPT THEY STILL DON'T HAVE LOGPROBS. ARGH.

The Mojo code has to run the CPython interpreter to run numpy.

Yes, the need to run CPython interpreter is what makes Mojo slow (and it will remain that way, unless they abandon their "superset of Python" promise).

13 million is substantial but not even close to the 100 million Modular got. Which really makes me wonder what Modular has been doing with that money, if they're still getting beat in benchmarks like this...

That's not a fundamental restriction or design problem with Julia, you're just describing JIT compilation. Plenty of languages can be compiled either ahead-of-time or just-in-time. Actually, this should be unusually easy for Julia, because their JIT compiler isn't a heuristic-based compiler like JITs for Python or JS.

The problem is funding. There are 0 full-time employees working on this issue because JuliaComputing has gotten about 10% of the funding Mojo has.

Not necessarily. Julia will always be 11 years older than Mojo, no matter how old both of them get, and that advantage won't shrink. Not to mention, Mojo is a superset of a 40-year old language with billions of dollars of development poured into it, plus an extra hundred million poured directly into Mojo itself. If we go by resources spent on each, Mojo has had gotten about 5x more investment than Julia.