How would you even know whether you knew the facts? It sounds like what you knew was more than just consistent with there being no embargo, you were explicitly told there was no embargo. After a certain point, there's a limit to how far up the chain any of us can be expected to follow the logical chain of what we genuinely think are true, and this doesn't seem like a glaringly obvious case where you were being reckless.
We're all (well, I guess not all, but the group that's worth caring about, and I hope it's at least most) just operating the best we can on the information we have and trying to make decisions based on that. As long as you're acting in good faith on information that you had genuine basis for believing is true, it seems like it would be unreasonable to expect someone in your situation to somehow intuit that you were given false information or grossly misunderstood what sounds like a pretty straightforward declaration of fact from someone you didn't have any reason to doubt.
At the risk of some armchair paycholoanalysis because it does seem like you genuinely feel some guilt over this: I can emphathize feeling guilty about the outcome of an action that in a vacuum would not have been hard to make differently, but my experience is that those of us who have a nasty habit of beating ourselves up over things when we really don't have much blame will often recognize when on the other side that it would not be fair to hold someone else to that standard. I struggle a lot with how sometimes knowing something is true doesn't always make it feel true, and even though hearing someone else saying it doesn't magically make it all better, I still think it's valuable to hear it from someone else, so if I happen to be right about how you're feeling, nothing about all of this is your fault, and to the extent that you're able to, try not to beat yourself up over your misfortune to get caught in the middle of all this due to circumstances that realistically were outside your control.
I read something a while back about curse words more commonly using hard, visceral consonants because it's a lot more satisfying to say them in anger or frustration. Really hitting the end of the f-bomb or the beginning of "crap" feels better than saying something like "aw, jelly belly". Even something like "gosh" instead of "god" just doesn't feel as satisfying.
None of this is scientific (at least, not my attempts to describe it), and I don't have a good explanation for every swear or epithet, but I don't think it would be as satisfying to say "that's lubu!" instead of "that's caca!"
> lightweight Swift UI and most logic in a headless cli app could be an interesting design choice
With absolutely no hard data to back this claim, my instinct is that a library would be even better. Anything you can manage to fit into a library can be much more easily tested, and then you can define whatever frontends you want (CLI, SwiftUI, etc.) that wrap it, and even leave the door open for people to implement whatever UI they might want.
Depends on the split. You’re probably right — even after worrying about cross-language ABI stuff, compiled libraries would have many advantages.
But especially with Agentic AI, I could imagine some scenarios where being able to run the guts of your editor out of process, e.g. on a cloud box or even a local docker container, being pretty advantageous.
This is how Claude Code GUI works but to be fair that’s less of an editor.
I think you're underestimating this. I released a GUI app in Rust earlier this year, and I already feel like it was a headache because there was pretty much no way to avoid dynamically linking a bunch of stuff, at which point any confidence of it working across various distros went out the window, so I had to settle for an AppImage as the only binary that I distributed. I wasn't even trying to target Windows or MacOS but I have to assume that would complicate things at least as much.
I'm not saying it's insurmountable, but I don't think it's accurate to call it "trivial". There are comments on this thread mentioning that Helix hasn't released in a while but that it's relatively straightforward to build from source; I'm not confident that would be easy to preserve for a full GUI.
> Each terminal cost $1 million (at 1943 values) and weighed more than 50,000 kg (50 tonnes). The first one was housed in the Pentagon, with an extension to the White House. A further 11 terminals were installed at different sites around the world, including one in the sub-sub-basement of Selfridges department store in central London
I've learned that I tend to underestimate how large inflation is for historical values, so I looked this up. $1 million in 1943 is apparently just under $19.5 billion today, which means the full set cost $234 billion. I'm not sure if the US foot the bill for all of them or not, but to make it more concrete, 44 of these would have cost more than entire budget for the Department of Defense for this year.
Others noted this should be $19m, not billion. That said, often a more useful analysis is percent of GDP -- this can give a sense of what fraction of effort of the total economy went into it. On those terms, 1943 GDP: $200bn, 2025 GDP: $30tn, for an increase of 150x.
So, depending on how you count, these were $19-150m each in today's dollars, or between 1/10 and 1/3 of an ASML EUV machine.
Yeah, I honestly wouldn't have commented at all if I had avoided such an embarrassing reading comprehension mistake, since the correct number is not particularly interesting.
My lesson for today is not to trust my ability to count comma separated digit groups.
1 mil seems like an arbitrary or at least rounded number, and also it's not like you could get one on the market, so maybe it actually didn't cost a million
Crap, today is not my day for reading comprehension I guess (combined with overcorrection for my anticipated error). Too late for me to edit, but thank you for pointing this out.
If the article itself (seemingly from the UK, as you point out) is inclined to assume that it's fine to describe it this way, I don't see why those of us from the rest of the world (which I'm inferring from your username is a group you're a part of) should object.
I have a house. I have no HOA. I'm very happy with this situation and don't see any possible value that an HOA could add to this situation.
Funnily enough, there does seem to be a sort of wannabe HOA in my neighborhood that is always dropping things off in our mailbox asking for donations and telling us about events. I never give them any money, and never go to their events though, so either they don't provide any value or the value they provide apparently is not derived from them having any enforcement power.
Or maybe I'd be circumspect to recognize that my neighbors having rights is just the price of me having rights, just like I'm not in favor of a police state even if it means that sometimes people will commit crimes. Who knows!
And I have a house without a HOA but did go through a bunch of complicated (and expensive) easement agreements and survey definitions that LePage’s to a lot of loose-gooey hand shakes and outright mistakes over the years.
I am by no means a fan of JOAS in general but things like the maintenance of private roads including winter plowing do need to be dealt with and while a couple of neighbors can probably get agreements drawn up for “only” $10K each, that only goes so far if more people are involved.
But that waters down the argument to the point of meaningless. For instance, did the egg shortage make the housing crisis worse, because every potential homebuyer has less money to buy a house?
I mean, if someone legally forced the homeowner to pay sell the house to them because there was a clause that required the owner to pay tens of thousands of dollars for expensive eggs and then sold the house again after and hoped to recoup the costs, then sure
Do you have data on that? Based on peopel I talk to, it seems like there are plenty of people on both sides, and it's not clear to me which one is the majority.
The only data most of us can refer to are Google Trends. The unprecedented peaks for "How to switch to Android", "iPhone revert update", "iPhone fix battery", "iPhone slow", "new iOS sucks", "iPhone bad now", "How to block iPhone updates" all reached new peaks with the release of Liquid Glass in late 2025.
Of course, this is only Google Trends, and even if we interpret this as a 4x to 100x increase in bad experiences with Apple products with the forced introduction of Liquid Glass, it still might be the case that >50% of people aren't consciously experiencing problems from it.
I'm not debating whether there are issues. Any sufficiently complex system will have issues, and those having issues will be very vocal about it. But I'm pretty sure it's not worse, or unacceptable.
By and large macOS is extremely stable and robust. Based on my both experience and hundreds of employees using Macs over a 10+ year period. We'd undoubtedly have had more support issues if we had used Windows, as an example.
No, you're debating whether "most" users have issues, which was your claim. I don't bother complaining to the IT people at my company because of fundamental issues in the OS that they can't do anything about, so I'm not sure your data implies what you think it does.
We're all (well, I guess not all, but the group that's worth caring about, and I hope it's at least most) just operating the best we can on the information we have and trying to make decisions based on that. As long as you're acting in good faith on information that you had genuine basis for believing is true, it seems like it would be unreasonable to expect someone in your situation to somehow intuit that you were given false information or grossly misunderstood what sounds like a pretty straightforward declaration of fact from someone you didn't have any reason to doubt.
At the risk of some armchair paycholoanalysis because it does seem like you genuinely feel some guilt over this: I can emphathize feeling guilty about the outcome of an action that in a vacuum would not have been hard to make differently, but my experience is that those of us who have a nasty habit of beating ourselves up over things when we really don't have much blame will often recognize when on the other side that it would not be fair to hold someone else to that standard. I struggle a lot with how sometimes knowing something is true doesn't always make it feel true, and even though hearing someone else saying it doesn't magically make it all better, I still think it's valuable to hear it from someone else, so if I happen to be right about how you're feeling, nothing about all of this is your fault, and to the extent that you're able to, try not to beat yourself up over your misfortune to get caught in the middle of all this due to circumstances that realistically were outside your control.
reply