ghusto

They'll be doing lots of things all at once

Make all of those things be related to "make the platform stable".

If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.

Oh, no?

They do now, because they realised people will put up with that crap when they looked at PC gamers. They didn't used to.

Having a large part of your team be unable to reproduce bugs is a significant development issue

But I just said, they are free and able to use development builds, regardless of geographical location. As far as I know, the OS is exactly the same, just has certain things disabled depending on region (for example you can breifly see the iPhone mirroring in the EU the first time, before it disapears).

Firefox has struggled to get the sliver of market share they have today. I highly doubt that there are that many people like you and me who crave a real Firefox engine on iOS.

Why bother with any of it then? If it's hopeless and not enough people want it, why even bother?

There are a lot of well thought out good solutions being posted here, but you have to bear in mind that these companies don't see a problem to be solved in the first place. It's like telling a mafia boss the solution to the cops being after him is to quit doing criminal things.

The solution is piracy.

And as usual, Apple has it crippled in order to make sure it can't complete with whatever they're trying to sell you instead:

https://ericmigi.com/blog/apple-restricts-pebble-from-being-...

I'm guessing the "many people [you] know" are category 2. Many people are in category 3, because most of the world is category 3.

Sorry, but I don't buy any of that. I've been defending Mozilla for years, but enough's enough.

but all existing Firefox users would have to download a second Firefox browser app, probably sync their accounts if they want to keep their data, and then remove the old one manually. You'd end with a Google Meet/Microsoft Teams situation (where one app is labeled "new" and it confuses the hell out of everyone)

You're making it sound like a problem, but those actions are trivial. You tell someone who's dying for a non-webkit browser on iOS "well okay, but you know you'll have to download another browser! And even sign-in again!". You really think they care?

Furthermore, developers cannot actually use the released app they've made if they're in the US, where a lot of Firefox devs are.

They absolutely can, because they're free to install development builds, which is what they should be testing anyway. Regardless, if development starts migrating slowly to the EU, that's a natural consequence.

Then there's the (what I can only presume to be illegal) Apple Tax you need to pay to distribute an app outside of the app store

This is the only real issue, but even then I'd say Mozilla should take the money they're spending on their current nonsense and spend it here instead. "Our mission is to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all". Really? Prove it. Furthermore, if we role over on this because of the obviously anticompetitive malicious complience Apple is showing, they win. This is the first step to getting them to remove that fee.

I'm tired of defending Mozilla here, so I have to say that working on their web browser is not a priority for them. In fact, it seems like they're interested in everything _but_ working on Firefox.

Housing is the only one I can agree on. The place is so damn big that outside of places like New York, you can get 2/3 times the space for the same money, in a lot of places even more!

The study focuses on books (and comics, but that only bumped it up by a couple of percent).

That said, I find it odd that people assume that reading a book is always higher quality than reading the internet etc.

It's not all that odd to me. The barrier of entry to getting something printed and published is much, much, higher than putting something online, which effects the quality quite a bit.

Obviously there are complete wastes of paper out there in terms of published books, but as a generalisation it's not odd to presume a printed book is going to be of higher quality than a webpage.

Except they don't _need_ to update, it's just a manifestation of the the very PC-ification we're talking about. You used to pop the game in, press the on button, and be playing. At some point someone figured out that if PC gamers were willing ot put up with unfinished games being shipped, so would console gamers, and it was downhill from there.

It "just works", unless it's time for a patch for that game. Which 98% of the time.

They make sense to many people, even if not to you.

I'll take a one-function device over a general device any day. You switch it on, it does the thing, you switch it off. General purpose computers are the exception that proves the rule, in that "the thing" in their case _is_ everything.

I couldn't care less about playing with randos on the internet, but am very interested in playing with people I know in the same room.

Technology was and always will be a means to an end, not the end itself.

Yes, but it's a thin line, and I contend that this is over that line.

If you satarise Nazis and some Nazis can't tell that you're making fun of them, that's good satire. If you write a peice that reads like any other peice of Nazi literature, that's not understanding what satire is.

Multiracial casts are a relatively new convention

I'm 47 and no it is not.

That's actually the point of the post. It's both boring and a disservice when we pretend otherwise. White guy as the main villain? Sure, let's go! Non-white characters _can not_ be bad under any circumstances? Boring and predictable.

When it's this poorly executed, yes it needs to be said.

I was going back and forth on whether it was for far longer than I should have been.

But show me something that has become so critical in your day that if I took it away tomorrow, your work would actually fall apart. Show me something truly life changing.

- I no longer look at log files. If there's an MCP that gets access, I don't even download them

- I don't look up implementation details, just say "I want this bit to do X". In general, I don't concern myself with technical details anymore

- I don't try to debug

The way in which these examples are life changing, is that I now solve abstract problems, not technical ones. Of course I could still do my job if AI disappeared tomorrow, but a road sweeper could also do theirs if the sweeping trucks went away too.

There's an old Bill Hicks bit where during his already awkward standup, he takes a moment to somehow dial the awkwardness up further: If you're of a certain age, you'll know the bit:

https://genius.com/Bill-hicks-on-advertisers-and-marketing-a...

It's awkward because you can feel how much he means every word. Of course it's part of the act and you're supposed to find it funny, but at the same time, he very much means what he's saying.

That's one way to frame it. For those who adopted Code Assist and made it part of their process, it's at best a technicality, at worst extortion.

Jesus. Is this what _we_ sound like when talking about IT?

To be even more specific then: Working and cheap alternative to the very real problem that this solves. It's not a made up problem, even though the current proposed solution was just shopping for a problem to solve so it could sell itself.

As consumer preferences and the broader entertainment industry continue to shift away from physical discs to digital

_Goddamn citation needed!_

Stop grabbing and straws and evolve. What you thought made you valuable, has been devalued.

You were never your output anyway, but you thought you were and got your self-worth from it, so now you're clutching at any argument against AI. But you don't need to! Your worth was never that you could do that computer stuff that others didn't understand.

Now adapt and move on.

It requires manual moderation. Companies like Facebook, Google, and co. have spent much effort telling you that's impossible. In fact, that is a type of half-truth that is a lie. The full truth is that it's impossible _at their scale_.

Their business models require little to no human moderation, because it simply doesn't scale (for their business to stay profitable).

Personally, my feeling is that if you can't take care of your product, you should go out of business.

If you want to stop this instance of "think of the children", build a working and cheap alternative that respects privacy. It is technically possible, so if you feel as strongly about it as your words suggest, do it. Once it's ready, spread awareness through old-media, new-media, politicians, everything and every means.

I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further

I tentitively came back to gaming after 20 years, and can not believe the crap current gamers put up with. Maybe it was a slowly boiling frog, but I'm still stunned at the Darth Vader like dealings happening now.

I'm not even mad at the gaming companies, it's the punters that need a slap. The companies are just following market economics, you can't blame them. The people bending over though ... Jesus, have some self-respect.