This team really have been thinking about weather a lot, and it makes me very curious about what they’ve created this time.
It’s that depth of thought and expertise that feels missing from most of the vibe-coded launches we’ve seen recently. I actually wouldn’t mind if Acme had vibe coded parts, but I bet they didn’t.
> it makes me very curious about what they’ve created this time
The rainbow and sunset alerts are really cool ideas. I'm now realising that a simple tie-in to astronomical phenomena could prompt a useful notificationa around it e.g. being worth going stargazing that night. I ski–learning that the near-term forecasts just changed would help me change my schedule the day before versus trying and failing the morning of.
I'm almost shocked we don't have a large weather model instead of a language model. Seems right up the alley.
Also I don't get what happened but I think it was AccuWeather or weather underground in the early 2000s where it was to the minute accurate and it seems like it's gotten worse since everywhere.
Re-read what you just linked. In the response from the JIMU:
"A 51-year-old man from Aldershot was arrested on suspicion of sending by public communication network an offensive, indecent, obscene, menacing message or matter."
This is the legal basis for the arrest. Without the retweet, police would not have had authority to turn up to his place of residence - twice - and demand entry. No doubt they preferred Brady voluntarily submit himself for interview at the station, but he refused, which I hope we can all agree is the morally correct position. No one should have police turn up outside their house - TWICE - because of a parody retweet.
The law might be a bad one (and probably is) but on balance better that police investigate suspected illegality than don’t. Overall I’d rather be somewhere where even a former royal can be arrested than somewhere the rule of law is optional.
This doesn't feel like good-faith. There are leagues of difference between "what you typed out" when that's in a highly structured compiler-specific codified syntax *expressly designed* as the input to a compiler that produces computer programs, and "what you typed out" when that's an English-language prompt, sometimes vague and extremely high-level
That difference - and the assumed delta in difficulty, training and therefore cost involved - is why the latter case is newsworthy.
When has a semantic "argument" ever felt like good faith? All it can ever be is someone choosing what a term means to them and try to beat down others until they adopt the same meaning. Which will never happen because nobody really cares.
They are hilarious, but pointless. You know that going into it.
Fastmail is the way. These are people for whom email is their job and focus and you get everything that comes with that, including good and responsive customer service.
So are the email servers used by the recipients of your emails, no? Almost everybody uses gmail, so even of you don't most of your email correspondence is going to end up, or originate from, on gmail servers anyway.
Because we exist within a market, where the choices of others end up affecting us - if the market "votes" for a competing thing, that might affect the market for the things you care about.
Your car analogy isn't great, but we see a similar dynamic playing out with EV vs combustion, and we did with film-vs-digital cameras. "Don't buy a digital camera if you like film" sure didn't help the film photographers.
This is like "HTML isn't code" again. For non-technical readers, there is their own language, and there is "code" - a bespoke language used solely to instruct machines. If you can't type to the machine in your own language (eg like you can to a chatbot) then you're using code. "The machine" is the device on the desk.
"ls" is code. You type it into the machine's keyboard, and it understands your code and performs that instruction. The statement is not "radically" wrong, it's an oversimplification that both communicates correctly to the lay reader, and to the proficient reader who understands the nuances and why they're irrelevant here.
I've been part of a European startup that added offices in Asia and the US, and we initially always partnered with local companies to do this. It's mutually beneficial. It allowed us to grow more quickly, and it allowed them to make relatively easy money (and, in our case, to dump some of their shittier employees on us without us knowing).
In Proton's case, they already knew each other because Tesonet had previously offered to provide infrastructure during a DDoS attack against Proton.
So maybe it's a conspiracy, or maybe it's just how things go. You can make up your own mind, but you should provide the facts when you make sinister insinuations.
I would assume that if they were astroturfing, they would be smart enough to use more than one account. Given that, I'm inclined to believe that you are part of an astroturfing campaign.
The summary is: if you use someone’s VPN, Tor, etc. you’re just setting yourself up. There is no privacy, and if you act like you want privacy, they’re going to pay more attention to you.
> Mails are superior in announcing to multiple people
People who are known at time of sending. A slack message can be searched by those joining the team much (much) later, those who move teams, in-house search bots, etc. Mailing lists bridge this gap to some extent, but then you're really not just using email, you're using some kind of external collaboration service. Which undermines the point of "just email".
> > Mails are superior in announcing to multiple people
>
> People who are known at time of sending. A slack message can be searched by those joining the team much (much) later, those who move teams, in-house search bots, etc.
People use slack search successfully? It's search has to be one of the worst search implementations I have come across. Unless you know the exact wording in the slack message, it is almost always easier to scroll back and find the relevant conversation just from memory. And that says something because the slack engineers in their infinite wisdom (incompetence) decided that messages don't get stored on the client, but get reloaded from the server (wt*!!), so scrolling back to a conversation that happened some days ago becomes an excercise of repeated scroll and wait. Slack is good for instant messaging type conversations (and even for those it quickly becomes annoying because their threads are so crappy), not much else. I wish we would use something else.
> Mailing lists bridge this gap to some extent, but then you're really not just using email, you're using some kind of external collaboration service. Which undermines the point of "just email".
Mailing lists are just email. They simply add a group archiving system.
reply