Did you even read the article and tried going through the process? Suggesting the user to download the app is front and center and the link to apply online is tucked away in a link at the bottom. Not great, but fine, I'll live with that. But that's not the end is it? The user clicks continue online application, then why does it still give you another screen nudging you towards using the app? Making users feel like they are doing something wrong by not using the app.
At a certain point I used some "windows 11 debloat script" and I haven't encountered a bit of Copilot or any other AI nonsense anywhere in Windows since.
Even with all the debloat scripts you can’t get rid of it in places like Edge. And if your solution is to tell me to use a different browser then… exactly lol.
What happened to "just enable X if you need it"? Why are we always okay with every new thing being enabled by default?
Is it because the average person isn't as tech savvy as most (if not all) HN readers to know any better, and those companies want the headcount of usage to look high to please stakeholders?
Where have you been for the past umpteenth years of computing where even in the Linux kernel stuff is enabled by default, let alone userland applications.
It's not just an icon in the notification area though!
There's a keyboard shortcut for it. I never figured out quite what it was, but every now and again Copilot would open itself while I was using Visual Studio or Emacs on my Windows 11 desktop PC. I assume I'm either hitting the shortcut, or a ghost key on my keyboard is stepping in and hitting it for me. (I could never reproduce this by pressing Windows+C.)
Copilot does stuff in the background. What stuff? I don't know. But, occasionally, on my desktop PC, I'd get a message box popping up saying that Copilot was unable to open this or that file. (Though, yes, perhaps it is just opening that file for no reason. Hard to say.)
(Both of these went away when I removed all the Copilot apps from the list of startup stuff.)
Copilot can be persuaded to get itself into a state where it expects you to log in. I had this happen on my old Windows 10 laptop somehow, when I logged in as my (local only) work user, something that existed to let me sign in to my old employer's Teams setup, their VPN, and use Remote Desktop to my work PC. And each time I logged in to my laptop, Copilot would pop up a login dialog. Though I can't deny that this was a handy reminder to remind me to quit it.
A keyboard shortcut? Damn, that's horrific. Terrible terrible stuff.
So instead of troubleshooting you went straight to "oh my god this is the end of days!" These seem like obvious user error or at worst bugs.
Not to mention you've pivoted from Copilot in Notepad to Copilot in general. Which are not the same thing. Copilot is a brand name and various instances of it are not connected at all.
You should have started with your 3rd paragraph, because that clarifies my misunderstanding of your comment. I stand by my comment as well, though. We can both be right here.
Unfortunately, you started with the first 2 paragraphs, so clearly you're more interested in moaning at me. But this is the internet, so that's fine. I already expected it. In fact, I'm disappointed. You're going to have to try harder.
To me this feels like a marketing gimmick. "It was the RSP that was constraining our tech. Just see the progress we can make without it now". And the hype and funding continues.
The world is becoming increasingly more uncertain geopolitically. We have incipient (and actual) wars coming, and near term potential for societal disruption from technological unemployment. Meanwhile social media has all but completely undermined broadcast media as a means of social control.
This isn't about protecting children. It's about preventing a repeated of the Arab Spring in western countries later this decade.
"Think of the children" is the oldest trick in the book, and should always be met with skepticism.
The Arab Spring was caused by a tripling of food prices. I somehow doubt something similar will happen in the west. As for the rest, ignoring the population's concerns (by suppressing social media) is the best way to cause political violence. So I see blocking the governments desires to shape political discourse as saving the politicians from themselves.
GP isn't interested in protecting children either. Punishing parents harder does nothing to improve the lives of children — in fact it makes them much worse, because now they are addicted to Facebook and their parents are in jail. It just makes certain people feel morally righteous that someone got punished.
sorry to be pedantic but, do you mean perhaps oligopolies? and by that do you mean marketshare or technology share? i'm just curious what people are looking for in ladybird (just better tech or better or governance?)
> We know the result isn’t idiomatic Rust, and there’s a lot that can be simplified once we’re comfortable retiring the C++ pipeline. That cleanup will come in time.
I wonder what kind of tech debt this brings and if the trade off will be worth whatever problems they were having with C++.
Andreas Kling mentioned many times they would prefer a safer language, specifically for their js runtime garbage collector.
But since the team were already comfortable with cpp that was the choice, but they were open and active seeking alternatives.
The problem was strictly how cpp is perceived as an unsafe language, and this problem rust does solve!
Not being sarcastic, this truly looks like a mature take. Like, we don't know if moving to rust would improve quality or prevent vulnerabilities, here's our best effort to find out and ignore if the claim has merits for now. If the claim maintains, well, you're better prepared, if it doesn't, but the code holds similar qualities...what is the downside?
It depends. I migrated a 20k loc c++ project to rust via AI recently and I would say it did so pretty well. There is no unsafe or raw pointer usage. It did add Rc<RefCell in a bunch of places to make things happy, but that ultimately caught some real bugs in the original code. Refactoring it to avoid shared memory (and the need for Rc<RefCell<>> wasn't very difficult, but keeping the code structure identical at first allowed us to continue to work on the c++ code while the rust port was ongoing and keep the rust port aligned without needing to implement the features twice.
I would say modern c++ written by someone already familiar with rust will probably be structured in a way that's extremely easy to port because you end up modeling the borrow checker in your brain.
> I would say modern c++ written by someone already familiar with rust will probably be structured in a way that's extremely easy to port because you end up modeling the borrow checker in your brain.
I can't stress out how much important this sentence is. I would even remove the "familiar with rust" part.
Anyone who still thinks it's good to use C/CPP on modern hardware where Rust support is available and good: please print the sentence above and post it all over your place.
The reason folks still use c/c++ is because of ecosystem. Chances are you have a lot of code you depend on and don't have straightforward ways to port it (and all the transitive deps). Especially in the case of larger enterprise software where there are 10s of millions of lines keeping you entrenched. Foundational things like your threading model, async executor, etc can make it difficult. If you're operating in a micro service environment and your core does are both minimal and ported, the journey becomes much more tractable.
cbindgen is woefully inadequate. Have you tried to use cbindgen to make interop between complex c++ work with rust? You will end up writing a significant amount of shim code manually, on both sides. Newer efforts like crubit seem promising, but still have some challenging edge cases.
Yes, I just translated a Rust library from non-idiomatic and unsafe Rust to idiomatic and safe Rust and it was as much work as if I had rewritten it from scratch.
What's next is no custom built PCs. They want us running dumb thin clients and subscribing to compute. Or it will be like phones. We'll get pre-built PCs that we aren't allowed to repair and they'll be forced to be obsolete every few years.
"they"? i see companies jacking their prices up, plain and simple. and us idiots still pay. ask yourself does intel no longer wish to sell CPUs to consumers? doesnt sound reasonable that intel would want to decimate their main market so AI companies can rule the world for some reason
If the custom PC market forcibly gets converted to pre-built PCs only, I don't see why intel is selling less CPUs. So I don't understand your point here.
he said thinpcs and dumb clients with the compute power in the cloud, not pre-built gaming pcs. intel sell both desktop and server, if you cut out desktop for all but the low powered i3 it takes to run a thinpc, they lose a massive chunk of revenue.
You act like companies do long term planning. They don't. Its always next quarter. And if you don't believe me, just look back to the pandemic, look at peleton, or car manufacturers or any of the dozens of examples
reply