And also teams within the product pushing for different things, like the recent Google Marketing Team vs Google Chrome Team wanting different approaches.
Windows 1.0 was release 38 years ago, microsoft has changed persona at least three times since then.
Not that we shouldnt be suspicious of facebook, but we really must actually seek evidence rather than just decry them as witches. It lets other companies get away with loads simply because they are well liked.
based on engineering a product that has a power capacity of <2 watt hours, to work reliably and is able to play and stream audio correctly.
To spy on someone using these glasses would mean decent audio stack that can actually reconnect by its self, rather than having to power cycle the entire device.
Not only that, but a level of attention to detail that means that what ever spying it does can happen reliably and inside a tiny power envelope.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying don't be suspicious of facebook, What I'm asking is to actually interrogate their level of skill.
facebook are frankly shite at software, just use any of their supporting apps.
o Portal, great hardware, shame that it never connected reliably.
o oculus: They have the power of facebook/instagram/social graph, yet its impossible to join your mate in game. Something Steam nailed in the days of dialup
o Rayban: cannot play audio reliably, pretty tricky to download pictures.
o Advertising: fuck me, its like oracle had a baby with SAP, and force fed it MS access forms.
Yes, yes its an advertising giant. But have you tried to get any usable and accurate data out of it?
Stop building them up like they are an unstoppable genius factory. Its basically a bunch of confused cats trapped under a duvet. The difference being those cats can drive advertising clicks.
While there's certainly a lot of evidence that its not a superconductor, no one can make the definitive statement that this article does without testing the original sample.
Games, collectibles, lending, money markets, exclusive virtual clubs, international payments, trading are just a selection of activities I’ve personally engaged in on chain in ways I could not have off chain.
Also whether or not you like speculation, many people do and it’s not a crime.
Having something you can transact with and store value that isn't completely vulnerable to your government's monetary and foreign policy/capital controls
The alternative is more likely - it becomes commoditized and many programs are offering it, so it would be strange for Adobe charge a premium for a baseline feature
>so it would be strange for Adobe charge a premium for a baseline feature
Alternatives to every baseline feature they currently charge a premium for exist, but because its industry standard everyone has to pay them.
Nothing Photoshop does today is special, in fact some of the ways it does things are worse than everyone else, e.g many filters being single core constrained and CPU bound.
You seem to be falling into a fallacy common among technical people: that a product's only value is its technical implementation.
Photoshop is sold to businesses. It's value prop is "you will be able to hire anyone and they will be productive day one, which will save a lot of money in training."
People buying photos op don't care about filters being CPU bound. They care about turning work around quickly and getting the next paying gig. A CPU bound filter is statistical noise compared to having to figure out how some different tool works.
> You seem to be falling into a fallacy common among technical people
I work as a creative director, my anger about this is decades of suffering what I consider substandard tools.
> People buying photos op don't care about filters being CPU bound. They care about turning work around quickly
We definitely do care about our computing power being used to the fullest of it's potential. This is why some of us even do 2D static work in After Effects now because its faster and uses more of the machines power than PS.
Photoshop developer asking: what examples can you give of 2D/static work that performs better in AE over Ps? I'm very curious about your workflow now...
Well I apologize for my presumption. Showing a little of my own frustration as a former engineer, now product person, I suppose.
I'm really curious why you care about using machines to their potential. Is it cost savings from not having to buy a more expensive machine, philosophical dislike or waste, or does it really come down to hours of non-billable time?
Adobe’s UI is also terrible, but it’s terrible in a way most digital artists are familiar with. Starting from scratch Gimp, Inkscape, and Adobe have reasonably similar learning curves.
The main advantage Adobe UI has is many people assume they’re stuck learning it at some point. But it’s definitely a waste of time and money if you’re happy as a hobbyist.
Adobe doesn't count hobbyists as a core user segment; why would they? Hobbyists don't need Adobe CC any more than somebody looking to multiply 2 numbers would need Excel 365.
The hobbyist market is already served by Photopea, Canva, Snapseed and many others.
Adobe has figured out how to charge a lot of Photoshop and likely will do the same for major additions to it. You can argue whether this is fair or right or that there are free atlerantives, but it is possible for Adobe and so they will do it.
Proper nouns are words. That answers the prompt, right? There was no mention of "common" in the prompt. If there was, the list of words I got with the same prompt on ChatGPT would have been a lot shorter.
Then the word rhamanagagi (which I just made up) is a word that would technically belong to the list just fine, it definitely not answered to the implicit intent of the question.
The strength of LLM is their ability to answer to unprecisely specified questions, being able to guess the speaker's intent, but in this particular case, it's failing the test.
It's interesting that those are all effectively monopolies on the talent. I wonder if that just counters the brain-drain the parent comment was referring to since high performers can't leave the union for a non-union role.
