Opening up one's device does not void the warranty in the US. We have the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act which forbids this, despite manufactures trying to groom us otherwise with those void if removed or broken stickers.
Will take a long time to de-program and by that time nothing will be replaceable to matter due to industries march towards preventing repair altogether.
There's also https://openobserve.ai, while not as stable as Grafana/Prometheus/Clickhouse, feels a bit easier to setup and manage. Though has a bit of ways to go, does the basics and more without issue.
Crazy crazy they spent so much on observability. Even with DataDog they could've optimized that spend. DataDog does lots of bad things with billing where by default, especially with on-demand instances you get charged significantly more than you should as they have (had?) pretty deficient counting towards instance hours and instances.
For example, rather than run the agent (which counts as an instance regardless of if it's on for a minute), you can send the logs, metrics, etc. directly to their ingestion endpoints and not have those instances counted towards their usage other than log and metric usage.
Maybe at that level they don't even get into actual by usage anymore, and they just negotiate arbitrary amounts for some absurd quota of use.
His legacy still exists and continues today. Even updated to modern sensibilities, cross-platform, and compatible with all your legacy Hypercard stacks!
As far as I remember, progression was Hypercard -> Metacard -> Runtime Revolution -> Livecode.
I was a kid when this progression first happened, my older brother Tuviah Snyder (now at Apple), was responsible for much of these updates and changes first at Metacard and then at its acquirer Runtime Revolution.
I even wrote some of my first programs as Hypercard compatible stacks. Was quite fun to see my apps on download.com, back in the day when that meant something :).
I always joked it required please and thank you due to its verbosity, but was super simple, accessible, and worked!
How nice, that even today one can take their legacy Hypercard Stacks and run them in the web, mobile, etc. Or create something new in what was more structured vibecoding before vibecoding :).
This seems like something completely different? Livecode looks like just another toolkit or SDK for developing standalone apps, which might be great for the handful of developers using it but certainly doesn't do anything to re-shape how users interact with their computers
Nope, is completely the same base. Scroll the homepage, and you'll see an example of Livecode (updated HyperTalk).
You can open your HyperCard stacks, or MetaCard stacks, or Runtime/Livecode Stacks in their IDE, code, edit, etc, similar to what you would have back in Hypercard days, but with modern features, updates, and additions.
It's backwards compatible with HyperTalk, its current language is an updated HyperTalk (i.e. an updated MetaTalk), that incorporates all that was, but adds new features for today.
Your Livecode apps can be deployed and run as cross-platform desktop applications (Mac, Win, *nix) , mobile applications, and as far as I remember, web applications with HTML5 deployment (so they say).
Not affiliated with them in any way, just sharing my understanding and memories.
Yup, I've been running Altcha on pirsch.io for a while now, and it was super easy to set up, is free, and open-source.
One of the main reasons we've switched from hCaptcha is privacy. The server-side stuff can be self-hosted and there is a Golang integration. Really nice.
Here is the link for anyone who would like to take a look: https://altcha.org/
Seems there's either too much supply of drivers, and/or this whole cat/mouse gambling game, is overall adding waste and inefficiencies in the system. Seemingly by design to hold on to the driver pool while the drivers not realizing they're cogs being shelved in the system at the drivers own cost time and monetarily.
Pretty amazing how far behind regulation is compared to all these dynamic dark patterns. Not only in Uber, but in most everything we encounter these days, we're being guided, routed, or decided upon by unregulated dark patterns that would clearly be illegal if the details of which were exposed and explained in a way that anyone could understand.
Every scientist does that at some point. I've easily crossed my fingers and hoped numerous times that code I'd written would work, especially on the first time. Even more rewarding in the superstition when the project is hard, and you're a bit daffy at the end.
It's a human thing.
Surely Feynman made jested comments before running experiments. I'm sure some digging in his wonderful books and letters will find many examples.
Back in the day we'd call this phase a design and workflow prototype as to not have to deal with all the technical components until the actual flow and concept is done.
Feels we're skipping these steps and "generating" prototypes that may or may not satisfy the need and moving forward with that code into final.
One of the huge benefits of things like Invision, Marvel, Avocode, Figma, etc. was to allow the idea and flow to truly get its legs and skip the days where devs would plop right into code and do 100s of iterations and updates in actual code. This was a huge gain in development and opened up roles for PMs and UI/UX, while keeping developer work more focused on the actual implementation.
Feels these generate design & code tools are regressing back to direct-Code prototypes without all that workflow and understanding of what should actually be happening BEFORE the code, and instead will return to the distractions of the "How", and its millions of iterations and updates, rather than "What".
Some of this was already unfortunately happening due to Figma's loss of focus on workflow and collaboration, but seems these AI generation tools have made many completely lose sight of what was nice about the improved workflow of planning, simply because we CAN now generate the things we think we want, doesn't mean we should, especially before we know what we actually want / need.
there is no need to this tedious, boring phase which you miss, especially since it still requires a significant of coding effort (eg to stitch a backend to figma).
you can vibe code a fully working UI+backend that requires way less effort so why bother with planning and iterating on the UI separately at all?
anybody who actually knows what they are doing gets 10x from these tools plus they enable non-coders to bring ideas to the market and do it fast.
That's always been the justification to skip this phase :). Tools have just changed. One-person to small-team wonders that could code and build directly made the same arguments.
My point isn't to stitch things to Figma, that's abhorrent to me as well. My point is to not get bogged down on the implementation details, in this case an actually working DB, those tables, etc, but rather less fidelity actual full flow concepts that can be generated and iterated.
Then that can be fed into a magic genie GPT that generates the front-end, back-end, and all that good jazz.
If the effort to produce websites goes tends to zero, the value of websites will surely tend to zero. Either issues with security and maintainability will be a break on this tendency or we will get to a point where generating a custom website will be something trivial that will be done on demand.
The thing is, the cost of producing websites is already pretty low, but the value of websites mostly derives from network effects. So a rising flood of micro crud saas products will not be likely to generate much added value. And since interoperability will drive complexity, and transformer based LLMs are inherently limited at compositional tasks, any unforeseen value tapped by these extra websites will likely be offset by the maintainability and security breaks I mentioned. And because there is a delay in this signal, there is likely to be a bullwhip effect: an explosion of sites now and a burnout in a couple of years in which a lot of people will get severely turned off by the whole experience.
If you need a website that needs prototyping in 2025, you're probably doing it wrong (eg launch on insta or something). But anyway, you can vibe iterate, and not just small iterations, but wholesale different value props and approaches, so why not. it's tangible, easier to test, and you get more meaningful feedback. I do this and it's 3-4x faster than working with a designer. And to be sure, we're not making websites, but protyping features into a saas app to test with users and ourselves.
The value of Amazon.com is not the cost to produce the HTML and JavaScript you see when you visit that website. It is a component of the Amazon business, and to Amazon it is extremely valuable, and to everyone else it would be almost worthless.
If someone has the idea for the next Amazon, as well as everything else you need beyond the idea, and tools like Supabase and Lovable allow them to get it off the ground, those tools are incredibly valuable to that person.
If someone’s ideas are worthless, their websites will be worthless.
I couldn't agree more. "Vibe coding" is pretty cool, but it's not sustainable at least with with current technology. You're much better off being a knowledgeable developer who can guide an an LLM to write code for you.
One thing I will agree on though is that LLMs make it easier to iterate or try ideas and see if they'll work. I've been doing that a ton in my projects where I'll ask an LLM to build an interface and then if I like it I'll clean it up and or rebuild it myself.
I doubt that I'll ever use Figma to design, it's just too foreign to me. But LLMs let me work in a medium that I understand (code) while iterating quickly and trying ideas that I would never attempt because I wouldn't and be sure if they'd work out and it would take me a long time to implement them visually.
Really, that's where LLMs shine for me. Trying out an idea that you would even be capable of doing, but it would take you a long time. I can't tell you how many scripts I've asked ChatGPT or similar to write that I am fully capable of writing, but the return on investment just would not be there if I had to write it all by by hand. Additionally, I will use them to write scripts to debug problems or analyze logs/files. Again, things that I am perfectly capable of doing but would never do in the middle of a production issue because they would take too long and wouldn't necessarily yield results. With an LLM, I feel comfortable trying it out because at worst I'd burn a minute or two of of time and at best I can save myself hours. The return on investment just isn't there if it would take me 30 minutes to write that script and only then find out if it was useful or not.
LLMs are better search. Google burned down the house to keep itself warm and held off on LLMs until it was inevitable and are now pulling up ahead. This is the logical conclusion. LLMs will be monetized and enshitified by ads.
Soon, some free smart LLM code generators will stop generating certain outputs and instead suggest using commercial components that have paid for promotion.
This can only be true of some products. Often there are a lot of concerns like privacy, white labeling, legal consequences that need to be considered _before_ you vibe code.
Most recently, FTC started to raise awareness and crack down on some abuse: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/07/....
Will take a long time to de-program and by that time nothing will be replaceable to matter due to industries march towards preventing repair altogether.
reply