Not only that, it's easy to let ethics steer my choice as well. And at this point I suspect OpenAI will never earn my respect.

Agree. So often, after immersing myself in the digital for a stretch, coming back to analog can feel almost meditative.

"Later on May 27, Williamson said that Giovannini had replied to him privately to say that his credentials had been compromised and that he was not the one behind the AI system."

Simple then, back out all the changes as though they never happened?

I'm happy to see the HIG (Human Interface Guidelines) referenced in the post.

I was unaware Apple still maintained such a document? There was a time when TOG's HIG [1] was the Bible for the Mac interface. UI nerds at Apple (and likely elsewhere) would enjoy debating/interpreting them for some project or another. (I don't recall anyone being burned at the stake but there were definitely discussions that could reach a heretical pitch.)

The HIG preached a kind of nuance and balance—when it allowed for somewhat less "staid" UI elements it would advise moderation.

This came about in an era when the graphical user interface was a fairly new thing to the public and inconsistency (Do What Thou Wilt) would only have destabilized the gentle adoption Apple was treading.

It was a marketable advantage for Apple as well. Consistency on the DOS side, as far as I know, came about only as companies tried to adopt familiar patterns from popular apps of the day. (Related: I talked to an engineer at Adobe about the hideous UI (my opinion) of Adobe Acrobat on the Mac and was told they wanted it to look like it belonged alongside the suite of Microsoft Office apps. le sigh.)

From 1992, see Page 72 for menu widgets: [1] https://vintageapple.org/inside_r/pdf/Human_Interface_Guidel...

Page 12 (PDF p36) seems almost written for the people who did the Tahoe menus

It would've been very funny if the left side is an actual screenshot of a system app from Tahoe.

> I was unaware Apple still maintained such a document?

They kinda do. For a long time HIGs were well researched documents with great examples and explanations.

For the past few years they've been used as post-hoc justifications (or just examples with no justifications) for whatever designs vomits out.

"This actually makes 0 sense … What you're saying makes sense only…"

I take issue with the phrase "makes 0 sense". Maybe it's just a common refrain these days?

Because you then explain how it could make sense. So it wasn't really zero, just required a narrow interpretation?

Amazing film. (I discovered it via "1001 Movies to See Before You Die.")

Copies are on YT:

https://youtu.be/7V_8aFQUfBw

https://youtu.be/AbXjEoD_dIE

https://youtu.be/j6DaB0Is4jM

It can also be watched in full on Wikipedia, as is the case with many films that are public domain in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Prince_Achme...

Remarkable visuals. Could be an indie computer game.

I am not a gamer but there is an indie game I wanted to try — is it called First Light? — that is essentially a shadow puppet realm.

There's a game I did try that used silhouette visuals that are IMO very Reininger-inspired — Limbo.

Ha ha, you're looking at the man behind the curtain.

(I thought the same: suspecting it's a kind of crossfade between accreting bodies and finished Earth.)

I instead see these sort of things (add the AppleVision Pro as well) as Apple feeling obliged to respond to "the public" (shareholders?).

"Samsung has this cool foldable phone—they seem to be taking the design mantle away from Apple these days."

"I hear this VR thing is the future of computing. Why isn't Apple in this space?"

I suspect even in the Jobs-era you might point to the iPad as Apple being pressured into responding with a product in the tablet space.

The Apple Watch a reaction to the Pebble?

Once the little square iPod Nano existed a watch was inevitable -

https://www.kickstarter.com/blog/a-new-era-for-design

I don't believe it's really that, but the fact that Apple 1) is profitable 2) holds a lot of cash, and 3) has a proven capability to execute new products.

So by not attempting to enter market niches, they could be potentially leaving a lot of money on the table, while the downside of the product failing to get traction doesn't really kill them.

I think that's the point the OP is making...

It is MR, it supports both.

For hand-made objects, a friend recently turned me on to a kind of German "How It's Made".

301 videos of craftspeople and Handwerkskunst:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLP7j_Ie2Gcc82bpqHPfLf...

It feels like the "Hype Wave" is going through oscillations before it damps down.

You know, it starts with hype about this new thing that is, perhaps, smarter than humans—or at least may soon be. And then the backlash comes and AI's reputation follows in descension.

And from such backlash and hate, some people start to say, "Hey, it's not so bad. It works for me." And maybe AI's reputation begins to swings toward the positive…

I suppose this is to be expected and perhaps ultimately healthy. I know for myself the swings in attitudes regarding AI have caused me to give pause and consider both sides with more regard than I might have. It has blunted some of my criticism and praise, sharpened others.