I think I despise throbers and spinners more than slow page loads at this point.

At least the throbbers and spinners are real. The true evil is "optimistic rendering".

"Our framework is so slow that we can't possibly manipulate data in a reasonable time frame, so we'll just lie to the user and say we did! What could possibly go wrong?"

Also in the running: giving absolutely no indication whatsoever to the user that anything succeeded or failed or is in progress at all (aka the Apple approach).

While that might seem generous in the US that is not universal and still woefully minimal. All fathers in Canada are entitled to a minimum of 5 weeks of leave let alone the maximum of 18 months leave mothers

I understand. I just mention it because many small business don’t have the cash reserve to offer anything if insurance doesn’t provide it.

I feel like most languages could use simd in the standard library. We have all this power in the vector units of our CPUs that compilers struggle to use but yet we also don't make it easy to do manually

C# is the language that is doing this exact thing, with the next two close options being Swift and, from my understanding, Mojo.

Without easy to use SIMD abstraction, many* of .NET's CoreLib functions would have been significantly slower.

* UTF-8 validation, text encoding/decoding, conversion to/from hex bytes, copying data, zeroing, various checksum and hash functions, text/element counting, searching, advanced text search with multiple algorithms under SearchValues type used by Regex engine, etc.

D as well.

I am curious if the benefits for alcohol addiction are from the reduction in appetite or reducing the actual dependence on alcohol. Either way still good to have another relative safe way to treat alcohol addiction.

I know BC hydro buys cheap power from other utilities to keep the reservoirs as full as possible. If California has excessive Solar power it could be used to keep the hydro reservoirs in BC, Washington, Oregon, and northern California full for other times.

That could be quite a good reason to build an HVDC link between the two regions.

There is already a 3GW HVDC line between The Dalles, OR, and LA. (one of the oldest HVDC links in the US).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie

I would like a bit more convincing that the text watermark will not be noticeable. AI text already has issues with using certain words to frequently. Messing with the weights seems like it might make the issue worse

Not to mention, when does he get applied? If I am asking an llm to transform some data from one format to another, I don't expect any changes other than the format.

My theory is that they would rather get more individual streamer subs for $5 and the streams do all the advertising for these for them as a plus.

This is a big reason that I will watch a stream on Youtube if a streamer simulcasts on both. The Youtube player is just such a better experience than Twitch's and I already pay for Youtube premium so I can also avoid ads.

It looks like the DOJ doesn't believe that the closed marketplace doesn't add value to consumers or businesses but only to Apple themselves.

I think the crux of the DOJs argument is that apple is using their dominate marketshare to rent seek and create artificial restrictions preventing competition with their own products.

The most compelling argument I can see is that due to its market share businesses cannot avoid dealing with the app store and it's fees.

But they can though, there are plenty of apps that are android exclusive.

Would it be OK for your bank to exclusively support Android? Would it be OK for government apps to only support Android.

Of course not.

What’s the relevance of that? If that were the case the law should be to make everything available by the web which is inherently interoperable, which I think we both agree with, but still doesn’t have anything to do with Apple.

If it is de facto mandatory for a business to make an app for Apple’s store because of Apple’s market share of smartphones, and Apple uses their market power to influence those markets for apps to their own advantage (for example, crippling other web browser apps except Safari), that is anti-competitive and may be against the law.

It is not legal to use your power in one market to gain an upper hand in another different market.

EU tries to force apple to allow different browser engine but apple still don't want that - safari mobile is crippled and support for PWA is half baked on purpose. Most businesses (such as banks, dating apps, music apps) who would stick to support only Web with half baked user experience on iOS would loose to anyone who would provide native mobile app.

Banking and government apps aren’t paying App Store fees, beyond trivial amounts in developer account fees.

Maybe not the App Store fees, but they are paying the apple tax.

* $100/year for the developer account. You may think this is nothing for a bank, and you may be right, but it's still $100 more than it should be.

* MacBooks for every developer that should be able to work on the mobile app and every QA person that should be able to test the app on an emulator, even if they already have a windows/linux laptop. The Apple devtools only run on macos. There is no choice. If the org was not already running MacBooks they will be forced to do so now, and invest in everything that comes with it.

This is irrelevant for the case. The question is if Apple has a monopolistic position.

No more than it would be OK for government apps to support only iPhone.

What's your point here? AFAIK, there aren't any important government apps or bank apps that are exclusive to the iPhone, nor is there any pressure Apple is putting on banks or governments to be exclusive to them.

It sounds like you made a completely unjustifiable leap from "because of the popularity of the iPhone, governments and banks need to make sure they have iPhone apps (because it's discriminatory and irresponsible of basic services like these not to support a widely-used computing platform)" to "Apple is forcing governments and banks to exclusively support iPhone".

You don't think losing access to ~50% of the market is a disadvantage for a business?

No they can’t because consumers have already made that choice. It’s done. We are talking about this moment in time, not some fantasy world where everyone ditched their iPhones.

But they can. If you think they can not then explain.

Will they? Probably not because people with Apple devices tend to spend more money.

It's a moot point... We're saying the same thing. Sure they could, if they wanted to immediately tank their business. You could set your house on fire. What's your point?

We're not talking about a fart app. We're talking about multi-billion dollar businesses that have been entrenched in App Store for a decade. Exiting that market isn't an option. If it was an option they would have done it.