Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pavlov's commentslogin

If you mean a 1950s Southern Democrat, then yes...

You couldn't pay me any amount of money to have a robot in my home if it's controlled from Elon Musk's data center.

And I'm a former Tesla FSD customer, so I should be the ideal early adopter for this product.


They must be looking at the revenue Claude Code is making on Mac and thinking “Why aren’t we getting 30% of that?”

Wouldn’t be surprised if macOS starts locking down CLI tools towards an App Store model too.


Developers are a tricky market for this because they could realistically move to different platforms if stuff like this started to happen. Or at least work on remote machines.

If gaming on Macs ever became popular though this would be a real risk.


Apple fans on the other hand are not a tricky market. They swallow whatever Apple gives them.

It doesn't matter if they are developers or not.


I'm not sure Claude Code is making enough for Apple to take notice & drastically alter their CLI like that? CC has 100-150k users across all platforms, paying $200-1200/yr each. Even if every developer is on the top tier Max plan, and on MacOS, that's $180mn in revenue at Anthropic. So even in the most optimistic scenario, that's only ~$50mn revenue for Apple at a 30% take.

That pales in comparison to the hardware & subscription revenues Apple brings in by being a dev-friendly OS.


Claude code reached $1B in six months in early Dec and given what I am seeing on ground, I wouldn't be surprised if just in last 2 months after that their revenue grew by double.

[1]: https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-acquires-bun-as-cla...


Source for the numbers? I am asking since Anthropic's revenue is 5+ billions, I'm guessing it's mostly from developers.

There is a $2400 plan as well.

> Wouldn’t be surprised if macOS starts locking down CLI tools towards an App Store model too.

The day that happens is the day Apple sees a mass exodus of developers to Linux, I don't think they'd be that stupid. They enjoy enough goodwill right now as the platform of choice (vs. Windows for those that don't want to run desktop Linux), I can't imagine they'd casually just throw that away.


> I don't think they'd be that stupid.

We're talking about the company that abandoned CUDA, OpenCL and Vulkan mere moments before they were killer technologies. If Apple wanted to phase-out Homebrew, I genuinely think most of the community would nod in unison and switch to developing in UTM. Mac owners are nothing if not flexible.


Yeah no, as a Mac and Linux user, I would seize buying Mac hardware and buy exclusively Linux if they took down Homebrew from being usable. At that point a Mac is no longer a Unix system.

The Mac is barely a UNIX system to begin with. It doesn't ship with UNIX compliance out-of-the-box, and nobody complains. You're likely the minority here.

If Apple locked Homebrew behind SIP or some other inconvenience, it would just result in more virtualization. The default Mac environment hasn't followed industry standards for more than a decade, most professionals are doing their work in a VM already. Truth be told, even Apple wants you to stop compiling software locally in the long-run: https://developer.apple.com/xcode-cloud/


If Claude Code was in the Mac App Store, they would have signed an agreement to do so (offer an in-app purchase option and Apple gets a 30% cut of subscriptions for the first year, 15% after that).

They would also be sandboxed such that the app wouldn't have access to the level of system integration it needs.


Presumably if you buy an AI subscription through an iOS app you also have to pay 30% Apple tax. Nice work for them.

I would expect also that there is a broader revenue sharing agreement for both being a system-integrated search engine and "world knowledge" chatbot (Google and OpenAI being the respective defaults)

It does work like that.

For me personally, I have used this method to spend my Apple gift cards purchased on a discount. Effectively I got a Claude subscription at 15% off. (You could argue this only works because OpenAI/Anthropic charge the same price across web/mobile, and I agree.)

So, as much as I despise Apple's business model, in some sense I have directly benefitted from it (other than stock price).


We’re closer to “doom” than in 1962 because Kennedy wasn’t a narcissist with Alzheimer and Khrushchev wasn’t an old KGB agent on a vengeance.

The leaders around the world now are the worst we’ve had since the 1930s. And now they have a nuclear arsenal that can destroy the world at their whim.


Woz is great, but I'd still go for Alan Kay.

Great mention of Alan Kay - however I enjoy hearing from them both. Both have an infectious enthusiasm for teaching and making things so dang simple. I enjoy coming back to their talks and learning something new

The EU has mostly done a good job of reining in private data collection. But unfortunately even tech-savvy people often don't see the big picture and just complain about cookie banners and other instances of malicious compliance by the companies who now can't collect and sell your data without significant financial risk.

...plus Trump is now threatening the EU with tarrifs unless they water down their data protection rules.

These days having the American president threaten you with random tariffs is the clearest indicator you’re doing something right.

Ellison’s Murdoch killer flexing its muscles for a mild warmup.

They got Paramount and CBS and TikTok, are allied with Twitter, and still have a chance of grabbing Warner.

I don’t think American billionaires ever particularly liked Murdoch, an Australian, controlling so much of the media environment in their country. Maybe they’ll make an offer for Fox News that the Murdoch heirs can’t refuse.


Yeah, it feels a bit like asking "which typewriter model is the best for swimming".

Is it a bad thing? People's life choices are their own.

29% seems like a fairly neutral number.


It's a bad thing if we want a cohesive society or if we wish to maximise well-being (both of which are challenged by people increasing their exposure to solitude and loneliness); and your claim about life choices is only partially true - we are all constrained/guided by genetic and environmental factors.

People's life choices are their own, but if many people choose to live alone, that objectively affects housing situation in the society.

if so many people can afford to live alone, perhaps it means that housing situation isn't that bad? in cities like NYC where rents are high, it's very common to have roommates for instance.

> Is it a bad thing? People's life choices are their own.

How much of a choice is it that they made willing? The number has doubled over the last few decades:

* https://www.self.inc/blog/adults-living-alone

* https://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/tag/living-alon...

There are health (and happiness) consequences to not being connected to other people:

* https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loneliness_epidemic


Perhaps the number was artificially low before, and more people actually wanted to live on their own. Loneliness is not the same thing as a one-person household.

I'm not seeing evidence that 15% is the correct number and 29% is automatically bad.


> Is it a bad thing?

Considering there are both housing and loneliness crises going on, and that being lonely or socially isolated leads to an early death and radicalisation, I’d say it’s fair to categorise it as a bad thing, yes.

Sure, not every single one of those people living alone will be lonely, but I think it’s fair to deduce that many people who are lonely and isolated live alone.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/19/health/loneliness-social-isol...

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/other/21402/Delany%...


I’d wager it also feeds into the fertility crisis. Roommates are a training ground for living with a partner and potentially family. If someone is living with a non-parent for the first time in their late twenties, there may already be habits or intolerances developed that make dating incredibly difficult.

The phrasing in your sources is absolutely horrible and brings back high school vibes of "lonely kids are bad because they are lonely, so they must be bullied to make them normal again". Just great.

It's utterly terrible regarding the issues of housing availability, settling down to start our own families, and elder care. The multi-generation pattern is that the grandparents watch the kids while the middle generation does useful work - the grandparents supervise the kids, while the kids keep the grandparents entertained. Then when the kids get old enough, they help supervise the grandparents.

I think we could naturally fall back into this pattern as housing, elder, and child care continue to get ever more expensive... but for the fact that the baseline suburban house is built with a single common living space, meant for a single family all constantly interacting with each other. You have to get into much more expensive houses with "in-law apartments" and whatnot before you regain the breathing room to have multiple generations living together. And now even houses with that extra space have become economic-grindstone legible due to short term rentals.


If you own shares in e.g. Costco, a long-term sustained trend of shrinking household sizes might give you pause.

I own shares of Costco and am a member and I’m not concerned.

As mentioned elsewhere it isn't actually particularly high for a developed country.

> People's life choices are their own.

How do you know it's by choice?


It triggers conservatives and Christians who believe in the nuclear family and biblical lifestyle. They despise liberty and agency.

Western ideas of liberty and agency came out of 1500 years of Christian. Christians put limits on liberty and agency, but that's very different than despising it.

Even from an atheistic standpoint, current levels of liberty and agency are clearly evolutionarily unfit. The fertility rate of Christians (and other conservative religious people) are at or above replacement level, which means that the unlimited liberty and agency folks are substantially below replacement levels.


This is something people don't seem to understand when it comes to pairing up and forming families. If there is no reliable method to do so and you leave it up to chance, then what's gonna happen? Of course, people will stop forming families at the rate they used to.

In a society where people only have enough children to replace themselves, having people without children means that society will slowly fade away and disappear.

There are a bunch of modern ideologies that don't try to understand or even deny that having children is the most powerful kind of democracy in life. When you are having children, you're essentially saying "I want more people like myself in this world". Under this premise, the western world is saying "I don't want to be here anymore".


Oh please, Christianity is no source of liberty. And as of now, conservative Christians are all about restricting liberty, that is literally their project. Conservative christianity despises liberty, but is all about forcing women into births and relationships they dont want and that harm them.

Bible doesn't ban being single. So your statement is false.

According to bible you can be single or have family, be happy or miserable. The matters is to not commit sins.


> “it is quite improbable for LLMs to generate a working program, unless it is identical with one from its training set”

This is a fascinating result. In some sense it’s like APL is actually the most human programming language, despite being one of the most difficult for ordinarily trained human programmers to pick up.


>it’s like APL is actually the most human programming language

As an incompetent programmer who is far more comfortable with even the most experimental and abstract literature than any of the "easy" programming languages, I agree with this.

Edit: I was going to fix that sentence, but it is a good example of what thinking about programming languages does to my brain. The idea of a context free human language is alien, thinking in such absolute and concrete terms is weirdly abstract.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: