I have been using Swift Vapor for personal projects for awhile and it's great. I kind of regret it now on some projects since I use a lot of Go too and I miss the speed of compiling/testing when I'm using agentic coding (where my goal is to put the agent into virtuous loops leading to a success state) - it just takes longer in Swift.
In agentic workflows, Go’s fast compiler and simple syntax make things so much easier.
I no longer write Python or JavaScript, even for trivial scripts. Why suffer sluggish performance or tooling nightmares when choosing a typed language no longer costs much?
As for Swift, it’s a harder sell. The docs aren’t there. The libraries aren’t that great. Apple-ism scares away a ton of folks, and the alternatives create less friction.
The rules and laws allowing the federal government to take over a state case against a federal agent seem much more damaging.
The cops involved in the most recent Minneapolis shooting will almost certainly face no repercussions because of this. The state can bring a case but the feds are clearly uninterested, they would simply take the case into federal court and spike it.
That's not how it works. When a state prosecution of a federal officer is removed to federal court, it's still the state prosecutor who's in charge. The problem is that as long as they were performing their duties they get a lot of leeway. A recent case was a cyclist killed by a DEA agent that ran a stop sign. Case dismissed: federal agents tailing someone don't have to respect state traffic laws.
The state can't bring charges against a federal agent enforcing federal law, otherwise southern states could have sued the federal agents enforcing integration.
1. I often see signs in such areas that flash when people exceed the limit. I’d urge you to pull over and see how often humans drive above the limit.
2. I’d urge you to also pull over and watch for how many drivers are not consistently looking at the road, such as using their phones, looking down at climate/entertainment/vehicle controls, looking at a passenger, etc
> The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.
I seriously doubt this. I agree that this is the perception but anyone working in the mobile space on both platforms for the past ~2 years will know Google is a lot more hard nosed in reviewing apps for privacy concerns than Apple these days (I say this negatively, there is a middle ground and Apple is much closer to it - Google is just friction seemingly in an attempt to lose their bad reputation).
Last time I tried Android I had to sign my rights away to everything the app wanted just to install it.
In contrast, on iOS I get prompted to allow or deny access to my information when the app tries calling Apple’s API to fetch that information.
For example, if an app wants access to my contacts to find other people using the app. On iOS I can simply say “no” when it prompts me to allow it to read my contacts. I lose out on that feature to find other people using the app, which I don’t care about, but I can still use the rest of the app. On Android it seemed like by installing the app, I had already agreed to give up my contacts… it was all or nothing. If I don’t like one privacy compromising feature, I couldn’t use the app at all.
Android may have improved this in the last few years, but I found it to be a dealbreaker for the entire platform.
> Last time I tried Android I had to sign my rights away to everything the app wanted just to install it.
Sounds like it was years ago... I remember that it was being introduced like... more than a decade ago? Of course maybe it took longer than iOS because of how Android works. iOS can just force everybody to use liquid glass with one update, Android has to think more about backward compatibility.
You still have the same things on android. If an android app requests eg exact location it can refuse to run and there’s nothing you can do.
That sort of behaviour is prohibited on iOS and an app won’t be approved if it does that sort of thing. They have to allow declining location permission or at least approximate location
Not sure I understand. So you're saying that a bad app on Android can request all permissions and tell you that it will refuse to run unless you give them, and the same app would be declined on iOS?
I could agree with that, Apple is more picky. Now personally, if an app does that, I uninstall it.
But technically, the Android rules are that you shouldn't do that, and when you request a permission you need to explain to the user why you request it.
It was there for the launch of the App Store with iOS. They didn’t have to worry about backward compatibility, because they took the time to worry about user privacy and app developer overreach from the very start.
A difference is also that Apple has 100% control over the hardware and can enforce their updates much better than Android.
Android has to deal with tons of devices, and allow developers to update their tooling while supporting older devices. I actually find it quite impressive how they manage to do that. Must be difficult.
All the more reason to get the design right out of the gate, instead of throwing something out there and hoping to fix it later. Especially something so fundamental, like privacy.
It would be nice if the app stores offered different levels of requirements. Let the market decide how much it cares about privacy (and security, and ...), reduce the friction for developers who want to do a particular thing, and give end users more confidence in the entire system.
reply