You can even add a nice "copy to clipboard button" that copies something entirely different than what is shown, but it's unnecessary, and people who are more careful won't click that.
You can even add a nice "copy to clipboard button" that copies something entirely different than what is shown, but it's unnecessary, and people who are more careful won't click that.
I can only imagine how much work that video was, but is really the first thing I've seen as AI video that gives me hope... and obviously a work of passion and a lot of effort to get such a great final result.
But this is exactly the type of generic software design advice the article warns us about! And it mostly results in all all the bad software practices we as users know and love remaining unchanged (consistently "bad" is better than being good at least in some areas!)
I think adherence to “consistency is more important than ‘good design’” naturally leads to boiling the ocean refactoring and/or rewrites, which are far riskier endeavors with lower success rates than iterative refactoring of a working system over time.
Latency is not an issue at all for LLMs, even a few hundred ms won't matter.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, except when working offline while traveling.
You can give Apple any age you want to. It’s not like it checks.
And I have no idea about the other topics you are going off on and what they have to do with Apple..
Not true. They're clearly unwilling or unable to remove this code path fully, or they would have done so by now. There's just a different workaround for it every few years.
Well.. that's certainly one way to view it. The other is:
"because the company set unrealistic expectations."
I'm sure this will slow down the growth of "AI datacenters." I'm sure of this.
We get rid of some problems, and we get a bunch of new problems instead. And on, and on, and on.