Totally agree. I was quite impressed with UI and bling bling when one of our employees installed it to monitor one of our servers (university team of 15 people) .However it turned out to be a total cognitive overload and very hard to bring it down to the strictly necessary to maintain the server. Then the cloud login stuff was a show stopper. We moved from nagios via icinga to checkmk, but we are still quite unhappy with good metrics based monitoring (we had munin at some point). A lot of the solutions seems overkill or oversimplify alarm states leading to a lot of false positives or duplicate notifications.
> Anthropic released vibe coded C compiler that doesn't work, how their LLM can help in maintaining PyPy?
This is the perfect question to highlight the major players. In my opinion, a rapidly developing language with a clear reference implementation, readily accessible specifications, and a vast number of easily runnable tests would make an ideal benchmark.
The question is rather if Mozilla can win this catch-up game and win new users. If they do this they should rather IMHO simply upstream the stuff done by Zen [0], which IMHO has a much more modern look and feel. Btw: there is still quite some users that are lost if UI changes. Particularly older people might simply use pre-installed Edge if they have to get used to a new design anyway. My parent in law were still on SeaMonkey until a few months. I installed some weird old school theme (I think echolon [1]) to ease the transition.
Even writing clones of products without seems pretty doable without any major effort (a friend e.g. let an ai code a Duolingo clone for his daughter). AI itself can clone itself based on output in a similar way it clones its input (I had to chuckle about the term 'destillation attacks' used by anthropic).
In a way we physical things were before. Are software patents the solution? Patents are one of the reasons why open hardware is not a bigger thing. I feel that this part of AI will move thing backwards.
Another alternative would turning around the evidence requirement and ask everyone for full provenance on inputs: no clue how this could ever work. This one only became evident because the 'author' voluntarily provided the evidence.
Wallet was one of the reasons I abandoned my well working lineageOS phone on a redmi note 10 as it was a cat and mouse game over month. I feel as long as a vendor does not support an os and Google is so hostile against modifications, it is not a good feeling that they can pull the rug at any time. I was multiple times in the situation when I wanted to pay with the phone and was in the end rejected. I think we need to take NFC wallets and esims away from phone/os vendors again. A seperate NFC enabled vendor independent trusted platform would be IMHO the way to go. Especially with ID wallets and universal bank wallets on the way in Europe. This that they cannot use security as a killer argument to keep us in their walled gardens. I know the solution is cards or a second phone, but affordance counts.
I know very little about lineageos. Their website contains very few docs, so I don't really understand what's this project is about. They don't mention Pixel 10, so I guess it's not supported.
GrapheneOS website in comparison contains a lot of things to read, so after a hour of thorough reading I had good impression what GrapheneOS is.
Are the websites really that different? (i use iphone) I checked both homepages and impression I got is that Lineage is android that focuses on long term support (the name points that out) and Graphene is not android (ok?) and it's focused on security.
Your Pixel 10 is not in Lineage devices so i would also assume it's not supported. (maybe it's too new?)
Thanks Tim… my memory is fuzzy - that was a lot of phones ago.
… and thank you for your continued effort! I have very big love for CyanogenMod/LineageOS, and that’s coming from a heavy pre-XDA user (I’ve had them all - PalmOS, Zaraus, XDA o2, Maemo, FirefoxOS, Ubuntu phone user).
I hope so. The changes can mean two things: people can only use it easily in custom roms (I guess there is an overlap there) or they actually would play with Google: i guess technically they could as well register and sign the stuff with a Google key as the software is all FOSS and would allow defining another responsible developer (otherwise Google would have to through out all FOSS without CLA from their playstore). I guess quitting would be an option, but IMHO the outrage outside the bubble would probably be hardly noticable, so what would be the point?
I find it an even more weird practice for anyone working with speech or text models not in the first paragraph name the language it is meant for (and I do not mean the programming language bindings). How many English native speakers are there 5% of the world population?
Adoption would mean that orgs like the European Payment Initiative behind Wero would adopt Linux phones even other AOSP ROMs. Not seeing that. Banks and streaming platforms that require DRM are keeping most (non-activist type) users locked in.
Break free from Google by buying their hardware and be dependant on them to actively support the device. Things are absurd at this stage. I guess there is different motivations behind mobile OSes.
reply