These time estimates seem excessive. 8 hours to “set up the environment”?
Also, doesn’t Expo already offer most of these boilerplates for free?
Edit: Not to mention that Expo handles most of the heavy lifting for each of these items (e.g publishing to app stores). What are customers paying for that they cannot easily get for free from the Expo team?
For a new React Native developer, I think it's minimum a full day of work to get your head around setting up a new RN project (even with Expo), finding out what dependencies your app needs and trawling through different documentation to learn it, things like that.
Differences to Expo - HyperFast is built on top of Expo. With Expo you get a great developer experience but you don't get code. HyperFast is a white-label best-practice UX app template, with
- app intro screens
- signup/login/logout
- an onboarding screen
- a news feed
- an item detail page
- ability to "like" items
- an account settings page where you can edit your info
- a push notification service that lets you set up pre-built recurring local notifications
This is what "boilerplate" or "starter kit" means to me, but if that language isn't correct I'm keen to know how you'd describe it! Expo is an amazing tool but the purpose of HyperFast is to actually give you an app that you can customise.
As for the heavy lifting on publishing to the app store - yes, kinda, it can handle submissions, but HyperFast tells you _what to write_ in your app store listings, what kind of imagery is needed, gives sample text, etc.
Not to mention the huge benefit of having me on our private Discord channel giving advice, code feedback, debugging help etc. All of this is included _on top of Expo_, not in competition with it.
Thanks so much for your feedback! I think it shows that my sales page isn't quite there yet.
A lot of folks here being critical of the partnership because Google hasn’t open sourced all of their models, etc.
Not too defend Google, but they have arguably the deepest AI knowledge in the industry and released many of the fundamental building blocks for today’s AI boom (transformers, Tensorflow, etc.)
Yet, their models are always deemed as second class (see recently Gemini), so I think they are trying to pretend to be "catching up" with vague announcements like this.
Good for shareholders, that's all. Not really sure I believe their "open science" argument.
They certainly “had” a lot of the building blocks and creators but most of those people seem to have moved on, and libraries like TF have become less used. I don’t think you can say today’s Google with it’s hand wavy AI products (Gemini with fake demos and still unreleased) and lack of core open source ML tools has the deepest AI knowledge anymore (see Meta for who has overtaken in the FAANGs and a bunch of startups like OpenAI who have taken a lot of the other talent).
Brave runs on Chrome and has some of the highest privacy protections.
I love Firefox, but just questioning if there aren’t good solutions available on Chrome.
And while Apple may
not have a business model as focused on selling data, they still have a growing ad business + weaker protections against fingerprinting and ad blocking
It's worth noting that PrivacyTests tests default configurations. If a browser has a good suite of privacy features but doesn't have them on by default, they'll score low on the benchmark.
Firefox, for example, can be hardened very well with options and extensions, but has many bad defaults (like Google default search with search suggestions on).
The site is all baseline, not potential. Not peak potential, not press a couple buttons potential.
Self driving cars (from industry leaders) are absolutely safer than human drivers. The real self driving test will be for them to be accepted by society. Will people accept that mistakes & edge cases happen and there isn’t a human to accept the blame?
Agreed. The author makes the point that middleware is trying to solve valid problems. I think the issue is that there are better ways to address it by “avoiding the middleware all together”. Especially since it introduces other 3rd parties into the mix
Yea, half of this seems like problems we've already solved for APIs generally, the other half is LLM specific, like prompt management, log/mon, response quality in prod, real time feedback
It seems like tools from our current ops ought to work just fine for the non-LLM uniqueness. At the same time, Datadog is pretty popular for a managed experience, and the LLM services as proxies kind of fit that model
This project looks great and aligns with my thinking
Reminds me of the cooler company Blue Coolers, whose entire business model is that they source from China to compete on price against USA made Yeti coolers. The company almost didn't make it, until they had their big break selling thousands of coolers at a trucker rally. The truckers loved the cheap coolers, even though they are only cheap because they are undercutting USA made coolers with Chinese ones. False consciousness in action!
Source for this story via clips of a the reality show "I Quit" in this youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZqt2bPZT1w
For USA made, I found Cordova, which I recommend especially because they use a denser foam, so you get more storage capacity for the same exterior dimensions: https://shop.cordovaoutdoors.com/48-qt-adventurer/
Yeah, it's so funny to see that people who believe a domestic manufacturing base is important have been so utterly defeated that there's not a single US-made phone they can buy. Well, except the niche Librem 5, but the leaders of the "conservative" movement are mostly swindlers, so they picked a cheap phone they can mark up more.
They lost what they valued, their leaders are selling them out, everybody laugh.
> The other part of the concern is that the only recourse is to uninstall the updater. However, that means users could miss out on critical security patches and other goodies. In other words, choose your poison.
This reads like utter nonsense. If the software updater provided to you by the manufacturer is delivering malware to you, why on earth would you bother trusting “security updates” it provides to you. Unless there’s any actual evidence, given that the researchers admit the installed apps don’t actually contain malware, it all reads like a bunch of unnecessary scaremongering.
> There is some debate as to whether these findings constitute the malware label, as opposed to PUPs (potentially unwanted programs). According to Sprint, its own testing has not uncovered any malware on the U686CL.
Also, doesn’t Expo already offer most of these boilerplates for free?
Edit: Not to mention that Expo handles most of the heavy lifting for each of these items (e.g publishing to app stores). What are customers paying for that they cannot easily get for free from the Expo team?