Code completion these days generally works pretty well - but only for matching single words or method signatures.
It would be really interesting to see the result of something that jumps beyond mere pattern matching for a single element and into the realm of suggesting real code completion, like filling out a lot of boilerplate, or even dare I say suggesting completions for variable names you had not yet even entered.
We all know that old phrase that the two largest problems in computer science are cache invalidation... and naming (and off by one errors as the old joke goes). What if completion was helping your naming to be semantically consistent, or helping train a younger developer in coming naming approaches? Is there any kind of code completion today that does that?
What would be greta to see is some kind of open source effort around all this before AI code helpers are lost behind a thicket of patents.
And THAT's why you don't believe Haters without firm proof, because when they can't find what they want, they will make things up or vastly exaggerate.
I came here to post that I was outraged at the outrage but find you have beat me to it!!! EXTREME FROWN at your STEALING MY IDEA even though you would have no way to know I WOULD THINK OF IT LATER!
So someone who likes to watch ads, and only can enjoy shows when they are broadcast at a particular time is the superior person.... RIIIIIIIGHT. Enjoy your TV cave, neanderthal man.
very bad to be absorbing large amounts, that means you're blocking them and attenuating them
It seems like WiFi absorbing clothing would be really popular with people that claimed they could feel WiFi or cell signals passing through their body...
Phone reception is already bad in a lot of buildings. Would not wrapping a giant layer of bar-feeding fabric around a building I am in make things even worse?
then the question is who did apple steal it from first?
If you just follow a simple exercise in logic, you can find out easily.
We know that Apple is not producing a car, so the car technology Apple stole must have been from a company also not producing self-driving cars.
If we look at this large diagram of companies I have here (sorry, too large to reproduce in ASCII plus I think it has a curly quote in there somewhere so it wouldn't render right anyway), we can clearly see the only company not in active work on self driving cars is in fact Chuck E Cheese (ironic I know, given the advances in creepy animatronic AI they pioneered).
Now you can see why it is imperative China not get their hands on this non-car car tech; China's uses of technology by the state are creepy enough already, and we cannot allow China to beat us in the non-car production gap.
Yet here we are with both Google and Facebook having non-working enterprise apps across the board, with no evidence whatsoever to validate your speculation.
Isn't it a message to every enterprise everywhere that Apple are in total control of your platform and can disable your work without notice or warning
If you stray outside the extremely clear and well defined lines? Yes. It is also a message to everyone. But as I said that message from Apple is very clear when you make use of this program, which is very much a privilege, not a right.
If I were a corporation looking to deploy an internal app, I'd be looking at non-apple options
Why? tens of thousands of companies deploy internal apps just fine. The system works really well and there are a lot of advanced management tools for internal apps... so why would you hamstring yourself just because Facebook did something immoral and stupid and in clear violation?
What you are saying is kind of crazy, like saying you'd move out a low crime area into a high crime slum, just because if you chose to rob someone you might be caught - even when you weren't planning to rob anyone... by moving your enterprise off iOS devices you are just opening it to a potential world of hurt.
An enterprise developer license for iOS allows a developer to sign an app for limited *internal* distribution of an app.
The point of the Enterprise developer license is it lets you distribute unlimited internal applications for use by your employees, on any number of devices.
When you have a developer certificate, you have to register devices you want to be able to distribute test builds for. Using an enterprise certificate for deployment, you do not have to register anyones device in your developer portal - in that way it's like an App Store build, but you can choose who to send the IPA (compiled app bundle) to for distribution.
Because it could be any device and Apple does not really know who is an employee or not, there's no control over who can install an enterprise signed IPA. That how companies were able to do this for so long, because Apple does not police this. It's a good idea because it keeps a lot of apps from the App Store that would be of no use to anyone outside of employees.
Apple does provide a way to do limited external testing, called TestFlight - there you can distribute a built to up to 10,000 external testers.
So it's clearly a violation Apple's terms....Apple has reacted, disabling the signing keys for these apps so they no longer function.
Oh yes, it's a very clear violation of terms as you are told when you sign up for the program that it's only for use by employees of the company (or contractors).
They didn't just revoke they keys for those apps though, they revoked the whole certificate on which all app distribution profiles were built - affecting possibly hundreds of valid internal apps as well. But since all we know is Google/Facebook were not obeying the rules, was the smart thing to do as who knows how many other apps were being sent outside the company... not quite sure how companies walk back from this to restore enterprise builds, as I've never seen a company run afoul of this rule before.
I think for both Facebook and Google, enterprise certs will be restored at some point - maybe Apple is going to do a review of all the apps signed with them and devices they are installed on before restoring.
There are a lot of valid uses of enterprise certs too, I think this blanket cancellation is more a message to never do it again, then they'll at least get internal apps back.
The deal is though by calling a prisoner they are fair game to monitor so that you can make sure they are not engaged in criminal activity from prison... I don't see why that would not extend to anything they could do with a recording of the conversation which also seems like a good idea for prisoners.
After many years of not using broadcast TV, trying out this service leads me to conclude that not only have I not been missing anything, but that free is too high a price for me to watch broadcast TV.
I wish them luck though! Surely someone will crack the legal nut that is re-transmission of public broadcasts.
YouTube's automated system doesn't require a DMCA claim to be submitted, it's an entirely internal system.
I wonder why more people don't put out claims against media from the larger companies through these forms, subjecting them to potentially the same random takedowns and de-monetization that other YouTubers have to live with...
If it's a chatbot that is so good at choosing photography that I enjoy every post, at that point what meaningful distinction is there between a chatbot and a human?
Perhaps that is the point when AI takes over, when on social media the chatbots are more fun to hang around with and follow than real people.
It's not experimental, it's just well hidden and requires an iPhone that can take "portrait mode" pictures.
I've had that for quite some time...
Look for "3D Picture" when adding media to your post.
I had no such option anywhere, in the Facebook app I have updated just today...
I could add 360 photos. I could post the live version of the photo (basically short video). But I had no option in "add to your post" nor "edit" that allows me to post a 3D photo.
I use the past tense though, because it turns out that to enable this feature I had to view someone else's 3D photo through the Facebook app, then click on "Try it" that appears at the bottom of the 3D photo! After that Facebook will let you add 3D media. I almost never use the Facebook app, only looking at it occasionally in a. desktop browser, so I had never seen that option.
Visit the Hangingpixels Photo Art Facebook account using the Facebook app to get the "Try It" link.... BTW if you also want to see what professional results look like for that feature, that account looks to post a ton of great 3D content (I hadn't been following them before, but am now).
After using the "try it" button, NOW I see a "3D" option in the same menu that has "Photo/Video" and "Tag People".
Although I can't find it now, I had read that Facebook only rolled this out to something like 10% of the user base to start.
The effect is also really bad, since it uses AI to fill in the missing spaces.
I disagree, I like the results from most of the images I have seen. And I am fairly picky about photo quality. The shifting mostly takes attention away from flaws like that around the edges of near objects (I do see it), and in fact probably serves to slightly emphasize the main subject...
Thanks for making me hunt down how to enable this, as much as I dislike Facebook I do like this feature quite a bit and will probably post some images to take full advantage, although I'll probably look more into creating custom depth-maps for better quality photos.
I really think this was a case of Facebook thinking they were "too big to revoke".
Every iOS developer pretty much is cognizant of the Apple rules around enterprise releases, so I would think Facebook would have had a lot of people purposefully choosing to break those rules to do anything like an external release (involving money no less!!) of an enterprise signed app...
As for how Android addresses this, maybe they could at least have more control around what apps are allowed VPN access, or some global way Google can define a kill list the system would check for? I'm kind of wondering if Google might not have something like that already for truly dangerous rogue apps.
It seems to me like most attempts at bringing 3D to the general consumer market are meet with a cool reception...
But I have to say, I have one friend on Facebook who somehow has had an experimental feature toggled on for her Facebook app, and she takes what are essentially slightly shifting 3D photos - and they do look amazing (part of which is that she is also a good photographer and knows how to take advantage of the feature).
Live Photos have a bit of a similar effect but the 3D perspective shift on a still subject, adds a bit of extra zing.
One area I can honestly see this really being great though are for things like eBay where you could better convey a sense of the item. eBay would have to support 3D display features like this though.
So, maybe between augmented/virtual reality gear slowly being accepted by the market, and more 3D gear like this going into widespread consumer devices... maybe we'll finally see significant uptake in consumer interest and use of 3D.
Slashdot Mirror
At 3am the morning before, forecasters calling for an inch of snow.
Later that same day: A foot of snow.
Or what about the snow on no forecast that suddenly arrives one day.
Forecasts are better to be sure but to call them "stunningly accurate" is laughable.
Code completion these days generally works pretty well - but only for matching single words or method signatures.
It would be really interesting to see the result of something that jumps beyond mere pattern matching for a single element and into the realm of suggesting real code completion, like filling out a lot of boilerplate, or even dare I say suggesting completions for variable names you had not yet even entered.
We all know that old phrase that the two largest problems in computer science are cache invalidation... and naming (and off by one errors as the old joke goes). What if completion was helping your naming to be semantically consistent, or helping train a younger developer in coming naming approaches? Is there any kind of code completion today that does that?
What would be greta to see is some kind of open source effort around all this before AI code helpers are lost behind a thicket of patents.
And THAT's why you don't believe Haters without firm proof, because when they can't find what they want, they will make things up or vastly exaggerate.
I came here to post that I was outraged at the outrage but find you have beat me to it!!! EXTREME FROWN at your STEALING MY IDEA even though you would have no way to know I WOULD THINK OF IT LATER!
Everything else.
So someone who likes to watch ads, and only can enjoy shows when they are broadcast at a particular time is the superior person.... RIIIIIIIGHT. Enjoy your TV cave, neanderthal man.
very bad to be absorbing large amounts, that means you're blocking them and attenuating them
It seems like WiFi absorbing clothing would be really popular with people that claimed they could feel WiFi or cell signals passing through their body...
Phone reception is already bad in a lot of buildings. Would not wrapping a giant layer of bar-feeding fabric around a building I am in make things even worse?
then the question is who did apple steal it from first?
If you just follow a simple exercise in logic, you can find out easily.
We know that Apple is not producing a car, so the car technology Apple stole must have been from a company also not producing self-driving cars.
If we look at this large diagram of companies I have here (sorry, too large to reproduce in ASCII plus I think it has a curly quote in there somewhere so it wouldn't render right anyway), we can clearly see the only company not in active work on self driving cars is in fact Chuck E Cheese (ironic I know, given the advances in creepy animatronic AI they pioneered).
Now you can see why it is imperative China not get their hands on this non-car car tech; China's uses of technology by the state are creepy enough already, and we cannot allow China to beat us in the non-car production gap.
Was the content actually false? It's not like Snopes is infallible.
Yet here we are with both Google and Facebook having non-working enterprise apps across the board, with no evidence whatsoever to validate your speculation.
Isn't it a message to every enterprise everywhere that Apple are in total control of your platform and can disable your work without notice or warning
If you stray outside the extremely clear and well defined lines? Yes. It is also a message to everyone. But as I said that message from Apple is very clear when you make use of this program, which is very much a privilege, not a right.
If I were a corporation looking to deploy an internal app, I'd be looking at non-apple options
Why? tens of thousands of companies deploy internal apps just fine. The system works really well and there are a lot of advanced management tools for internal apps... so why would you hamstring yourself just because Facebook did something immoral and stupid and in clear violation?
What you are saying is kind of crazy, like saying you'd move out a low crime area into a high crime slum, just because if you chose to rob someone you might be caught - even when you weren't planning to rob anyone... by moving your enterprise off iOS devices you are just opening it to a potential world of hurt.
An enterprise developer license for iOS allows a developer to sign an app for limited *internal* distribution of an app.
The point of the Enterprise developer license is it lets you distribute unlimited internal applications for use by your employees, on any number of devices.
When you have a developer certificate, you have to register devices you want to be able to distribute test builds for. Using an enterprise certificate for deployment, you do not have to register anyones device in your developer portal - in that way it's like an App Store build, but you can choose who to send the IPA (compiled app bundle) to for distribution.
Because it could be any device and Apple does not really know who is an employee or not, there's no control over who can install an enterprise signed IPA. That how companies were able to do this for so long, because Apple does not police this. It's a good idea because it keeps a lot of apps from the App Store that would be of no use to anyone outside of employees.
Apple does provide a way to do limited external testing, called TestFlight - there you can distribute a built to up to 10,000 external testers.
So it's clearly a violation Apple's terms....Apple has reacted, disabling the signing keys for these apps so they no longer function.
Oh yes, it's a very clear violation of terms as you are told when you sign up for the program that it's only for use by employees of the company (or contractors).
They didn't just revoke they keys for those apps though, they revoked the whole certificate on which all app distribution profiles were built - affecting possibly hundreds of valid internal apps as well. But since all we know is Google/Facebook were not obeying the rules, was the smart thing to do as who knows how many other apps were being sent outside the company... not quite sure how companies walk back from this to restore enterprise builds, as I've never seen a company run afoul of this rule before.
I think for both Facebook and Google, enterprise certs will be restored at some point - maybe Apple is going to do a review of all the apps signed with them and devices they are installed on before restoring.
There are a lot of valid uses of enterprise certs too, I think this blanket cancellation is more a message to never do it again, then they'll at least get internal apps back.
The deal is though by calling a prisoner they are fair game to monitor so that you can make sure they are not engaged in criminal activity from prison... I don't see why that would not extend to anything they could do with a recording of the conversation which also seems like a good idea for prisoners.
If someone sent me a creepy email showing me they knew my password, that would build the opposite of trust...
After many years of not using broadcast TV, trying out this service leads me to conclude that not only have I not been missing anything, but that free is too high a price for me to watch broadcast TV.
I wish them luck though! Surely someone will crack the legal nut that is re-transmission of public broadcasts.
YouTube's automated system doesn't require a DMCA claim to be submitted, it's an entirely internal system.
I wonder why more people don't put out claims against media from the larger companies through these forms, subjecting them to potentially the same random takedowns and de-monetization that other YouTubers have to live with...
If it's a chatbot that is so good at choosing photography that I enjoy every post, at that point what meaningful distinction is there between a chatbot and a human?
Perhaps that is the point when AI takes over, when on social media the chatbots are more fun to hang around with and follow than real people.
It's not experimental, it's just well hidden and requires an iPhone that can take "portrait mode" pictures.
I've had that for quite some time...
Look for "3D Picture" when adding media to your post.
I had no such option anywhere, in the Facebook app I have updated just today...
I could add 360 photos. I could post the live version of the photo (basically short video). But I had no option in "add to your post" nor "edit" that allows me to post a 3D photo.
I use the past tense though, because it turns out that to enable this feature I had to view someone else's 3D photo through the Facebook app, then click on "Try it" that appears at the bottom of the 3D photo! After that Facebook will let you add 3D media. I almost never use the Facebook app, only looking at it occasionally in a. desktop browser, so I had never seen that option.
Visit the Hangingpixels Photo Art Facebook account using the Facebook app to get the "Try It" link.... BTW if you also want to see what professional results look like for that feature, that account looks to post a ton of great 3D content (I hadn't been following them before, but am now).
After using the "try it" button, NOW I see a "3D" option in the same menu that has "Photo/Video" and "Tag People".
Although I can't find it now, I had read that Facebook only rolled this out to something like 10% of the user base to start.
The effect is also really bad, since it uses AI to fill in the missing spaces.
I disagree, I like the results from most of the images I have seen. And I am fairly picky about photo quality. The shifting mostly takes attention away from flaws like that around the edges of near objects (I do see it), and in fact probably serves to slightly emphasize the main subject...
Thanks for making me hunt down how to enable this, as much as I dislike Facebook I do like this feature quite a bit and will probably post some images to take full advantage, although I'll probably look more into creating custom depth-maps for better quality photos.
It's more like - stuff people are actually doing in the real world has become interesting enough, that more people may actually want to use it.
I really think this was a case of Facebook thinking they were "too big to revoke".
Every iOS developer pretty much is cognizant of the Apple rules around enterprise releases, so I would think Facebook would have had a lot of people purposefully choosing to break those rules to do anything like an external release (involving money no less!!) of an enterprise signed app...
As for how Android addresses this, maybe they could at least have more control around what apps are allowed VPN access, or some global way Google can define a kill list the system would check for? I'm kind of wondering if Google might not have something like that already for truly dangerous rogue apps.
It seems to me like most attempts at bringing 3D to the general consumer market are meet with a cool reception...
But I have to say, I have one friend on Facebook who somehow has had an experimental feature toggled on for her Facebook app, and she takes what are essentially slightly shifting 3D photos - and they do look amazing (part of which is that she is also a good photographer and knows how to take advantage of the feature).
Live Photos have a bit of a similar effect but the 3D perspective shift on a still subject, adds a bit of extra zing.
One area I can honestly see this really being great though are for things like eBay where you could better convey a sense of the item. eBay would have to support 3D display features like this though.
So, maybe between augmented/virtual reality gear slowly being accepted by the market, and more 3D gear like this going into widespread consumer devices... maybe we'll finally see significant uptake in consumer interest and use of 3D.
One thing I hadn't read yet, do Facebook and Google have similar apps for Android? It seems likely they would... but I had not read that they did.
Reports are all Facebook internal iOS apps (and betas) are dead.