Same! I main macos, love the hardware, but I keep a very close eye on Linux (asahi, omarchy etc) in case Apple gets any more toxic, and I am forced to jump ship to something else, and that something else won't be windoze.

The last straw with MacOS was when my US bank cards expired, I could no longer update apps I already paid for, I could no longer install apps I already paid for. Everything was held hostage, could not install FREE apps via the appstore on macos or on ipad.

That day my eyes opened to what Apple has become.

You simply cannot trust Apple with your computing future. They're a fashion company now.

and plus one here! I don't know, I like my mac workflow but irritation and aggravation have crept in more frequently of late. Last week I was told a binary that clang++ had just produced from my own code could not be run because Apple couldn't check whether it was safe.. And what to make of power users complaining bitterly about Tahoe & liquid glass etc? I'm hanging on to Ventura for now.

Not all rich guys are part of the ORGANIZED RICH.

Some are, many/most aren't.

For some rich guys whole point of being rich is to be maximally independent.

Some billionaires are all kinds of weird flavor of Anarcho Capitalist (completely anti government), libertarian (small government), objectivist (suspicious of government and against overbearing regulations and mob control).

Not all, but many. I think there is an important distinction between independent minded successful people and crapitalists, the ones who collude with the government and enforce their fortunes via regulatory capture.

Not every rich person is obsessed with controlling the world and other people.

Many just want to live their own lives, and want as little as possible interaction with the government.

I'm not talking about a small capitalist with a nice house and a nice car.

I'm talking about the super rich.

Thr super rich have to be the government to be super rich and the little capitalists just ride the wakes made by the big guys.

These ideologies you mention are just political stances made by the rich in order to promote their measures amongst the poor.

Objectivism was made by Ayn Rand and it was promoted so much because it defended capitalism. They disseminate these ideas in order to promote their stances.

Libertarianism and ancapism are inconsistent because it pretends that large capitalists wouldnt immediately organize themselves into another large state power. A state is necessary to not have all out war between the powerful.

Ask any political science major and they dont take these ideas at face value because these ideologies cant exist as such.

They are more like life style politics than real political frameworks.

I suspect the reason they are even espoused is because they represent an immediate weakening of government regulation that can increase profits. The capitalists want people to think it can exist so they can have more power.

But a true libertarian or ancap reality is a pipe dream. Its true purpose is to create less oversight and thus more profits. Your average Joe, like you or me, has about 0 benefit from this.

This is my view too. The shareholders voted for it.

Granted, Musk (or maybe it was a couple board members) did make some strong statements that felt like threats (that if the vote didn’t go through, Musk was going to leave).

But still, it went to a vote.

> Shareholders voted for it. Don't understand how the will of Tesla Shareholders is a corporate governance failure... couldn't read the rest of the article behind paywall, but the premise seems so borked that I'm not going to bother.

Sounds like a failure on to think critically.

The board consists of long time friends of Musk's, people who are heavily invested in his other companies (and so have and want to continue maintain their positive relationship with him), and his brother.

It's not that the board can't vote, it's that the board isn't remotely independent. And according to the WSJ A number of members of the board have hung around many late nights doing drugs with him.

And to be clear it's that that their doing drugs, it's that if you're close enough with someone to be regularly doing hard drugs with them you clearly aren't independent.

"for any reason other than to cure a fatal disease" ... what about non-fatal but debilitating ? Sounds like you have a pretty absolutist view here ? What other reasonable exceptions can we imagine outside your rigid criteria ? Why should we not have nuanced discussions of the entire spectrum of reasons ?

Also hard to miss your implication of "agree with me or you are on par with a nazi"

What burden of disease are we talking about here?

Ask the question would you be comfortable allowing babies to be maimed or killed in a medical experiment to develop a treatment to some malady?

Make no mistake that is what we are talking about here. You are testing a therapy. Because you are editing the genome adverse effects of the therapy are irreversible and present at birth. Those adverse effects may include maiming or death.

So now that we have established what the stakes are, I ask again, what set of diseases do you think it is worth the risk of maiming and killing babies to develop a cure?

I think fatal monogenic diseases could be justifiable. But even there a valid argument could be raised about alternative approaches - ex. Cystic fibrosis.

Once you get beyond that things start getting dicey pretty quickly. Only a hop, skip, and a jump to nazi medical experiments on the “mentally retarded”. Check out the Belmont Report for more formalized ethical framework for medical experimentation on people.

I'm pretty happy we got the Internet!!!! 10/10 would choose again

Hehe don’t blame you for it, it took me a long time to regret the internet and I still hope to be proven wrong

I don't see any food scarcity? A lot of innovation coming. Indoor 3D farming if needed. Bio-engineered algae bars if needed! Constant innovation at all levels. Why would food production methods collapse? Some currently productive agricultural land may become unproductive, and then areas too cold now will then become viable, so a shift, not just a one sided destruction. More CO2 means plants grow faster, more global greening. Disruption yes. Over 50+ year time span? Very manageable. Unimaginable advances in energy and robotics ahead.

I always thought the usability/ergonomics of the Flutter framework was slightly poor, but the Dart language itself is pretty darn awesome!

I also rolled my own reactivity interfaces, and made many shorthand functional wrappers for standard things I use frequently to debloat the GUI boilerplate.

My stuff isn't robust enough to consistently live seamlessly alongside regular flutter code or to release for anyone elses use.

I am super stoked to see that I'm not the only one to find the stock flutter framework something that can be improved, and that others more confident than me (and more experienced with other frameworks) are putting things like this out there.

Congratulations and thank you.

I even dream that someone would reimagine the entire flutter framework, maybe just reuse some of the low level rendering and eventing but rebuild everything else on top of that.

Apologies to anyone on the flutter team if I sound too critical, you've put something very useful and difficult out there, but a lot of design choices seem to be mutually inconsistent or just have so many counterintuitive aspects to them, usually justified in the name of performance.

I often find myself thinking I am just not smart enough to figure out the right way to do something with flutter. A lot of abstractions that are hard to get them to work how I want or run into weird corner cases. Many simple things I just ask AI to solve it, and after seeing the solution I can see it is right, still don't understand why my attempt was not.... so I welcome alternative interfaces and approaches.

Thanks for the kind words! I came up with this library based on my own experiences — I had a few insights while using these patterns, and decided to turn them into a library.

Flutter chose to design its framework around an approach similar to React, which I think was a deliberate trade-off.

However, I feel that the Dart language itself lacks several important features. For example, we can’t implement JavaScript-like Proxy objects or getters/setters in the same way. This makes it impossible to achieve deeply reactive behavior like what Vue provides.

In addition to Dart being pretty neat, Flutter itself has been a pretty first class citizen then it comes to documentation and developer tooling/experience.

Mobile remains a big surface to integrate and evolve well.

I couldn’t agree more.

> I always thought the usability/ergonomics of the Flutter framework was slightly poor, but the Dart language itself is pretty darn awesome!

I think a lot of ergonomics issues of the Flutter are because of Dart language lacking in some areas. Flutter team even demonstrated how Flutter is expected to improve when certain features land in Dart. (Not sure if/how cancelation of macros will affects this.)

I'm (im)patiently waiting for augmentations and declaring constructors to be completed. Augmentations alone will help with so many things.

I agreed.

For casual users there exist a huge chasm between "everything just works" and "everything works except x, y, z and those you must open seperately with Chrome"....

I think many people will rather just use the 1 thing that does everything perfectly well, rather than switch back and forth between two browsers because one is slightly better "most of the time" but also completely unusable some of the time.

For me, I am thrilled to be able to make Ladybird my main browser eventually, and consume my streaming in other apps and browsers.

I don't think civilization ends if temperatures rise dramatically. A lot of existing agricultural land gets destroyed, but some currently unusable/unproductive areas that are too cold become viable. So the regions will shift. Painful but not insurmountable if it happens over a 50 year time span. But even if there wasn't such a compensatory mechanism, modern problem solving abilities will find a way - yes really. Look at the problems already solved. Nuclear reactors, solar power, vertical farming, genetically enhanced crops, alternative food sources will be engineered if the need arises. We can really stop saying that we know for sure society will end. I don't know how poor people will be affected, and yes there woll be winnners and losers as always during massive disruptive change - but hardly the end of human civilization.

What a brilliant idea. Definitely love it for politics. Not for CEO of any share I own!