Readit NewsYou don't think your bank is in the loop on payments you make with your bank's card???
But no one would force you or anyone else to leave that Apple ecosystem you hold in high regard. There would simply be more opportunity for alternatives that, if they are well implemented, may even provide such a robust product for such a long time that even devoting little energy to the decision on security grounds may make it more appealing than Apples. Or maybe some feature, such as the one I described for accessing banking institutions after office hours, might make such an impact on your situation, that you become more open to those additional choices. And if not, again, you may stick with Apple all the same.
[0] https://help.apple.com/pdf/security/en_US/apple-platform-sec...
“Opportunity for alternatives” is not free. There will be a trade off to enabling it, and my perception is that it’ll negatively affect those who are happy with the status quo.
FWIW I use Linux on my desktop computer, believe in open source, etc. Since mobile phones have become much more than phones and are now a sort of master key to your entire life, I am happy to have that key reside in as high a trust environment as I can find.
But with AI? Your comparison to going to the moon feels apt. We're deep into the age of the hyper scalers, but AI has done far more to fill me with dread & make me think maybe Watson was right when he said:
> I think there is a world market for maybe five computers
This has none of the appeal of computing that drew me in & for decades fed my excitement.
As for breakthroughs, I have much doubts; there seems to be a great conflagration of material & energy being poured in. Maybe we can eek out some magnitudes of efficiency & cost, but those gains will be mostly realized & used by existing winners, and the scope and scale will only proportionately increase. Humanity will never catch up to the hyper-ai-ists.
I feel the same way. Developments in computing have evolved and improved incrementally until now. Networks and processors have gotten faster, languages more expressive and safer, etc but it’s all been built on what preceded it. Gen AI is new-new in general purpose computing - the first truly novel concept to arrive in my nearly 30 years in the field.
When I’m working in Python, I can “peer down the well” past the runtime, OS and machine code down to the transistors. I may not understand everything about each layer but I know that each is understandable. I have stable and useful abstractions for each layer that I use to benefit my work at the top level.
With Gen AI you can’t peer down the well. Just a couple of feet down there’s nothing but pitch black.
>What I described (bonuses over reinvestment) is a decision shareholders (employees) get to make.
Sure, My only point is there's nothing about being employee-owned that requires or even encourages allowing employees to vote on how money is spent, or anything at all for that matter. A privately owned company is just as likely to consider input from employees as an employee-owned company is.
Both employee owned companies I worked for the board made those sorts of decisions without any say from employees.
> Both employee owned companies I worked for the board made those sorts of decisions without any say from employees.
If there was 100% (or majority) employee ownership, would the employees not have the ability to use the general meeting process to eject board members they didn’t like? Aren’t employees voting for nominees to the board, allowing them to use a write-in process to bypass a hostile board?
JUnit