This is completely incorrect. Large companies like Canonical are all in on Flutter even now, they're making it the default for desktop UI development in Ubuntu and are writing a lot of their own apps in Flutter.
The "layoffs" were not any of the core team, it was just an offshoring, of infrastructure devs at Google that happened to work on Flutter builds, to Europe where they rehired for the same positions there.
Google Workspace has been moving to KMP. They said at KotlinConf that it has replaced their decade-old transpiler from Java to ObjC, which is very impressive.
Yes this is because they are starting with a Java codebase and that obviously makes sense there.
You have other platforms like Google earth who when it was time for a proper rewrite went with flutter and dart along with a bunch of Google cloud stuff and Google Ads.
I think IDE preference leans further towards subjective than many believe.
I find that IntelliJ IDEs are fine, but not nearly as amazing as they're often hyped up to be, and similarly while Xcode has problems it's not nearly as bad as is often claimed.
My experience is somewhat colored by Android Studio and JVM ecosystem stuff like gradle and proguard though, which have been more cumulative pain for me than anything Apple-side in a long time (Cocoapods was pretty gnarly but SwiftPM has fixed that).
Xcode 26.2 is a 2.1GB download, which expands to 8.63GB on disk, which includes the macOS SDK. The iOS SDK and simulators are another 8.38GB. Luckily Xcode versions can share iOS SDKs now, so you only need to install them once. Really the biggest disk eater is Xcode's default behavior of creating a huge set of simulators for every platform.
At 8.6gb of disk usage, they could include the entire macOS Mojave ISO disk image[0] and still have ~930 MB to include fit the IDE. It's just unprecedented.
You’re counting the development SDK against the IDE. Xcode itself doesn’t require that space, and you’d need that space regardless of IDE choice if you were targeting the platform.
Indeed, and unless that changed since, the Mac downloader isn't even capable of resuming downloads properly so if anything happens while you download these 13GB, it's back to square one.
You can't be serious, Xcode is the worse IDE I ever used, while Android Studio isn't great, it cannot be compared to that.
Xcode is so sluggish it's slower than an electron app despite being native, the xcode app upload is so broken even Apple released a third party tool to bypass their own IDE and its undocumented config files look like from the 90s and do not work well with git.
The UI is sort of okay but that's not going to cut it. You can feel the decades of cruft in this IDE, it feel like using Borland.
The UI is nice and I already know how to set up projects so it’s much better for me. The config files work perfectly fine with git, that’s where I put them.
What I wish for would be a lego technics creative box with motors etc... Thats closer to what I had as a kid and I built a lot of fun things with that. Never liked the basic legos that much though
Hacker News is almost indistinguishable in spirit from a well-run subreddit. Reddit is not centered on user profiles and followers and yet, Reddit is included in the Australia's social media ban.
It is clear from the ruling that by including YouTube, Reddit and Facebook, they take a broad definition of what social media is, essentially anything with user interaction and Hacker News definitely fits the bill.
And if your criteria includes "social aspects like user profiles and followers", then GitHub would fit too: it has user profiles, followers / stars, and allows for discussion. It is even included in the "social media" list for ESTA and visa applications for the US. We could even include StackOverflow, I mean, it used to be common practice to build a profile, chasing a reputation score so that you could show off to recruiters.
> Reddit is not centered on user profiles and followers and yet
This is not entirely correct anymore, many of the new features added to Reddit over the last 5 years have focussed on expanding precisely this aspect of the site.
Originally it wasn't. It was more similar to hackernews, just more general. Lately it's going all in on wanting to be a social media platform full of dark design patterns to keep people hooked. Hackernews has barely changed from its beginning. I don't feel overwhelmed browsing it. Five minutes of reddit and I fall into a dopamine hole that can be hard to get out of. It's no longer part of my daily routine for that reason.
You can't follow people or have followers. There's no notification system when someone "likes" your comment. It doesn't lend itself towards pulling you back with the latest comment or post. There is the front page algorithm, but you can always just go to /latest or /active. It's about the content, not the users.
Critically, there's no ads or monetization (which is where all that garbage comes in).
HN is an anti-social media. It is not inclusive. If you are not a tech geek or cannot articulate well you are not welcome here, and will be ignored.
You cannot follow or be followed. There is no attention drawn to your username or profile. Everything about HN is designed for you to just read a comment and move on, not caring much about the human behind it.
You can't really compare those 2. Agents a re non-deterministic. I can tell Clod to go update my unit test coverage and it will choke itself, burn 200k tokens and then loudly proclaim "Great! I've updated unit test coverage".
I'll kill that terminal, open it again and run the exact same command. 30k tokens, actually adds new tests.
It's hard to "learn" when the feedback cycle can take 30 minutes and result in the agent sitting in the corner touching itself and crooning about what a good boy it is. It's hard to _want_ to learn when you can't trust the damn thing with the same prompt twice.
The data is very clear that the rate of mental illnesses is increasing. Rates of severe mental illnesses like Schizophrenia are also increasing.
NONE of the current theories being experimented with on patients have a concrete, proven scientific basis with some such as the decades-long SSRI scam have actively harmed patients and created physical dependence/addiction and actively causing harm to patients and their families (eg, SSRI-induced suicides).
I trust science, but I don't trust scientists any more than I trust any other human with their money, career, and reputation on the line. I trust the FDA and pharmaceutical company ethics even less (eg, Bayer knowingly selling HIV-infested drugs to hemophiliacs, saying Oxycotin is non-addictive, or the revolving door that allows non-working SSRIs to be released and marketed as working despite all evidence to the contrary).
Our ability to diagnose mental illnesses are improving.
50 years ago many people with mental illness would go undiagnosed. They would instead self-medicate through alcohol, illicit drugs, or risky behavior and die far too young after leading miserable lives.
This is an assertion, but there’s no supporting evidence and many indicators you are incorrect.
50 years ago was 1975. It wasn’t the dark ages and the worst cases were already being moved to asylums for at least 150 years before that.
Suicide in particular is hard to hide any suicide rates are going up despite treatment. If mental illness rates are the same as 50 years ago and more people are getting effective treatment, we’d expect per capita rates to decrease.
Impoverished third world countries where people have nothing but problems almost universally have higher reported happiness and less suicide.
Severe mental health issues don’t just go away because you drink and if alcohol could suppress the problems, we’d never have made treatments to begin with.
In terms of “self medicating” with drugs, we’re hitting an all-time high (pun intended). Risky and self destructive behavior is also way up as evidence with our prison systems overflowing.
Nothing indicates to me that mental health is improving and everything seems to indicate it getting worse despite all the attempted interventions.
> Because the problem's not a "neurochemistry issue" (that theory's been debunked and the "chemicals" in play have never been known), and the solution is "no better than placebo."
It most certainly has not been debunked and mind altering chemicals most certainly do work.
SSRIs have _questionable_ efficacy but that's not the same as proven to have none, which is an exceptionally high bar.
If you don't have a serious model for what you are treating, then you are experimenting on your patients and hoping it works for unknown reasons. Not too different from folk remedies. Even worse, patients are essentially never informed that the doctor is throwing things at the wall hoping something sticks.
reply