The way people keep describing Google, at least from the outside, sounds like a jobs program for developers funded by ad revenue.
So many of their products oscillate around the bar of profitability but so few reach the level of materially affecting Google’s bottom line that they can continually pop in and out of existence like subatomic particles.
Meanwhile the developers on these projects work towards their products brief moment in the sun so they can leverage it to move up and out, leaving it to die on the vine.
It’s a chaotic way to run a company, a decent way to make a living as a developer, and a shit way to build any kind of legacy, either as a company or as an individual.
From the POV of your employer your compute is powered by your decent salary, not bananas and coffee. If that goes away you’d be a fool to keep pointing your brain at your employer’s problems.
Thus, your compute is significantly more expensive than AI. Thankfully your taste is also part of your package deal, and is where you deliver real the value over an LLM.
The AI CEOs have been screaming for years now about how AI is scary, you should be afraid of it and it’s going to take your job.
“Mythos is too dangerous to release.”
“OpenAI offers a bounty if you can get ChatGPT to teach you how to do a bioterroism.”
“Agentic agents will replace entire categories of jobs. They’ll just be like, gone”
This is all signaling to their customers; no not you on their $20/month plan, the governments and corporations of the world who have deep pockets, fat to trim, and borders to defend and expand.
It’s no surprise that people don’t like AI. It’s not for people.
If a cop says your problems go away for $100, you pay it, because the downside is huge by comparison. The problem is the cop getting away with it, not that you paid the bribe.
Package introspection fails with an error that there are other swiftpm processes running when there aren't in a clean project with no .folders - probably a race with itself. That means no automatic configuration for tests or executables, debugging, etc. Just "build all"
Because to watch usage go to zero while charging what it actually costs to successfully run the service would immediately liquify the slow moving quicksand investors are currently standing in.
That plus the legal risk is too high, which gets added to the math of making copyright deals + computing, and they decided it didn't make sense at the moment. Even Grok is clamping down on the video side. Can't beat bad economics and lawyers/politicians coming down your throat no matter how good the product is.
reply