Exactly. If they just lay people off, that's just cost cutting, and potentially seen as a bad sign. If they're saying they're laying people off because they're replacing them with AI, then they're innovative!
The question is how does the product outlook appear? Most large companies do layoffs constantly to appease investors and nobody blinks twice, why would they care if you made the P&L even better if it doesn't degrade the product in their eyes?
I really think layoffs and stock buybacks within 12 months of each other should be prohibited, if not downright make stock buybacks illegal. Have extra capital? Then pay a dividend.
How is the Anthropic stuff on Bedrock in general? We're using OpenAI stuff on Azure right now and it's frustrating how slowly stuff gets rolled out in our region(s).
Ladybird was mostly developed by one person (Andreas Kilng) with no financing whatsoever ,Servo was mostly developed by a team who was being paid with Mozilla money.
That was true at the start, but it's most definitely funded development now and that's what will probably get them over the finish line.
If the development work went into debating, specifying and expressing required behavior as a written spec more exactly (beyond w3c specs and towards the more pragmatic reality of what current browsers actually do) then very long term we can probably have engines that are AI built [or just more easily developed by humans] from a combination of the written specs and the set of tests they need to pass.
Using AI for adversarial development (e.g. one group tries to break and hack it, the other group defends and refines) could get interesting and wasn't really an option before. Anything that's now available to reduce the human resource cost of development could make a big difference.
> So Andreas working on webkit means he has no browser engine experience?
Who said "no experience"? (except you, of course)
I've said, an I repeat myself so maybe this time it'll work, Andreas had no money whatsoever, while Servo was developed inside Mozilla that poured millions of dollars on it and created a dedicated team to build it.
It makes all the difference in the World, the actual experience on building a web browser is irrelevant, given the initial disparity of time, money and resources available.
It makes all the difference between a random guy building a working twitter clone and Meta building a working twitter clone.
The first one is an amazing accomplishment, the second one is a mehhh at best.
it has been underway for much longer and was built with people with actual browser engine experience
The key point is that Ladybird was developed by one person (not people) with some browser engine experience over a realtively short period, using only personal resources. While Andreas Kling worked on WebKit, his experience wasn't at the level of building an entire engine, which is evident from his videos. Experience alone isn't enough; he learned much of what he needed while developing Ladybird. While Andreas Kling is talented, many other developers on his team were equally skilled and yet he's the only WebKit developer I am aware of who built a browser on his own.
A task that not long ago was considered too hard to tackle, he proved it can be done even by people with relatively modest experience on building a browser.
It should be highlighted that Andreas main skills are his tremendous communication skills and the way he builds a mental model of the problem he's trying to solve, not his past WebKit experience (he wrote an entire OS, before building a browser for the OS he built, as a side project)
Render most of the frontend server-side and just use JavaScript for the dynamic bits only, I guess? I personally haven't done it like this since the advent of SPAs, but I'm guessing lots of things are still built like this.
Dozer [0] doesn't require any special permissions. I guess this is needed by Bartender because it creates a little pop-out menu that shows the icons somewhere else?
Among many. Apple’s security model has a lot of ups and downs like this. I gather any app that needs access to anything on the screen outside of itself requires “screen recording” permission. I know all of the Remote Desktop apps, as well as color sampling functions in browsers, Adobe’s apps, and all of the designer tools with similar functionality require it.
Guessing it reads some credentials out of environment variables. The client side example shows the server issuing a token so I guess it's only the server that has/needs the credentials.
Yeah, reading that example looks like it's basically signed URLs, and you define the permissions by deciding who can receive a signed URL on your server. Not a big deal for my use cases.
