Readit News> Why not use UUID7?
> "ULID is much older than UUID v7 though and looks nicer"
For those unfamiliar, UUIDv7 has pretty much the same properties – sortable, has timestamp, etc.
ULID: 01ARZ3NDEKTSV4RRFFQ69G5FAV
UUIDv7: 019b04ff-09e3-7abe-907f-d67ef9384f4f
A display of "just doing things", no permission needed and no need for barriers and red tape.
It is another reason why I have huge promise for Substrate [1] founded by James Proud (UK native moved to US) another display of "just doing things".
However in Europe and the UK, it's "this law allows you to do this, this and this", "we've changed the law, here is a massive immediate fine", "ban encryption" (this nearly happened), "ban maths", "we are the first to regulate and ban this".
It is no wonder the US will continue to be great at building things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finitism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(philosophy_of_...
The gap between noticing something is unsatisfactory and successfully doing something about it (capital, time, effort, risk, market share, …) is massive. It’s really only the second line they have to worry about. If the customer is unhappy but it’s too hard/expensive to switch, or there’s no other options, etc that’s really not a problem. It might even be good for “engagement” or whatever.
The gap is even wider when there’s extra barriers like network effect (dating apps) or legal rights (tv, movies, music). And the more things tilt in that direction - inherently cheap products with huge artificial moats - the more power they have. Every tick up of market capture fundamentally justifies another tick down in quality and/or an increase in price, when needed. This is just the ‘enshittification’ concept we’ve come to know.
Worst case, like another comment mentioned, when the market occasionally does produce something notable - let them do the legwork then buy it. And the bigger entities get the easier that becomes. They get harder to catch up to, while gaining more money and influence to purchase a competitor.
This isn’t 2005 where you can just make a social network or streaming platform with no consequences and take over the world. You’re not even allowed to make the app without permission.
AND as the article mentions, our only classical defense is ‘vote with your wallet’. Which presumes that a critical mass of people would be informed, willing, organized, and able to structurally boycott. Clearly we’re not equipped for that kind of economic warfare on every front from burritos on up.
And as the consumer continues to weaken economically, we actually get less power.
> But if they are actually doing that (which is unclear to me) or if they are bad in some other way, then how do they get away with it? Why doesn’t someone else create a competing app that’s better and thereby steal all their business? It seems like the answer has to be either “because that’s impossible” or “because people don’t really want that”. That’s where the mystery begins.
Pretty much all the article’s examples are known to be happening. As to why - it’s essentially because it’s impossible, just not because no one can code a dating app. Consumers have no real leverage. There is structurally no back-pressure on this in any way, by design.
Just the other day, I was confronted with a security screw that instead of having 4 flutes on it (Phillips head), it had 3. I just drilled it out.
https://www.ifixit.com/products/mako-driver-kit-64-precision...
Is there any software that can use this to break up the single mp3 into the numerous individual song tracks ? And insert metadata ? And perhaps also fingerprint each track to match it to a specific version of the song ?
My last sentence was on more valuable problems, we are finding it makes sense to go straight to GNNs, LLMs, etc and embed multidimensional data that way vs via UMAP dim reductions. We can still use UMAP as a generic hammer to control further dimensionality reductions, but the 'hard' part would be handled by the model. With neural graph layouts, we can potentially even skip the UMAP for that too.
Re:pacmap, we have been eyeing several new tools here, but so far haven't felt the need internally to go from UMAP to them. We'd need to see significant improvements given the quality engineering in UMAP has set the bar high. In theory I can imagine some tools doing better in the future, but the creators have't done the engineering investment, so internally, we rather stay with UMAP. We make our API pluggable, so you can pass in results from other tools, and we haven't heard much from that path from others.