I wouldn't say so. The 'Learning by mistakes' step in the demo shows that the AI can work through these issues, presumably this can be done more efficiently than a human.
The learning from mistakes part of the example is – you tried /port_wines but the path is /wines/port instead.
But what about if the path is actually /beer and you have to pass a hidden undocumented query parameter called ?wine=1 for it to give you wines. But then the response is still of Beer objects (because that's the only thing the API validator would allow), so you have to map all the Beer fields to their equivalent Wine counterparts. But not all of them make sense, so you have to ignore them. Which ones? Ask the engineering team. Turns out the guy who wrote all this left years ago, and no one remember how it works. Someone digs up a link to a documentation page, but that internal wiki was taken down and so it returns a 404. You ping a sysadmin to see if they kept any backups. He points you to a few PBs worth of SQL dumps from an internal migration a few years ago and asks you to take a look in those. You simultaneously have to write up a status update for senior leadership which is due by end of day and give them a revised launch date for the project. They want to know why it can't be done in half the time.
The day an AI can figure all this out, I will be looking for another career. Until then I'm fine.
This. Even before Musk arrived there was a lot of debate about Twitter being overstaffed and departments are not producing any value at all. I don't know more or the details, but this is what sometimes I was reading years back.
That's the baffling thing to me. For the better part of a decade people have talked about Twitter being an overstaffed pack of idiots whose day to day largely consists of presiding over the fall of Western civilization. Now that they've been purchased by a jackass, however, they're suddenly a bunch of saints who've only been doing their best to hold back the tides of barbarism. I get the feeling that someone less of an asshole and more ideologically-aligned to the commentators could do the exact same housecleaning Musk is doing and they'd be cheering him on.
By your reasoning hating on Kevin Spacey is also in vogue. It's probably not in vogue. It's more likely that his own words and actions are resulting in lots of people not liking him. Imagine that. A world where your own words and actions have consequences.
Based on talking to those who dislike him they're mostly pretty hating him for things he hasnt done, views he doesnt hold and traits he doesnt have (no, he isnt a success because he had an uber wealthy father who owned an emerald mine, it was a tiny share in a mine and his father contributed little to Musks business ventures).
Musk is a driven, childish, stubborn, fairly intelligent, 90s era libertarian who really likes first principles reasoning and this leads to both success (SpaceX) and failure (Boring company).
> they're mostly pretty hating him for things he hasnt done, views he doesnt hold and traits he doesnt have
So they have actual reasons to hate him. Superficial reasons, but you didn't once mention anything having to do with it being in vogue. Evidence of it being in vogue would be people who don't know why they hate Elon, but they do know their friends hate Elon.
> no, he isnt a success because he had an uber wealthy father who owned an emerald mine, it was a tiny share in a mine and his father contributed little to Musks business ventures
This is debatable by reasonable people.
> Musk is a driven, childish, stubborn
These sound like real reasons he could be disliked rather than it being your claim that it's simply in vogue or "traits he doesnt have" in your words.
> who really likes first principles reasoning
That's part of his PR and the image he tries to convey. He fails at it quite often because of his childishness and impulsive knee jerk reactions that he falls victim to on a regular basis. He is far more driven by emotion than by reason. I mean it's highly probable he owns Twitter now by being legally held to a poorly written contract he had no real intention of following through on. It ironically seems like neither he nor many of his customers want to be at this party he ended up at.
Musk is eminently hatable. He's also a competent businessman. The odds of him turning Twitter into Stormfront are very low, yet many are acting like it's already happened. What is the point of calling for a boycott of a company that hasn't yet done the thing you don't like?
Not at all, but that's not what they say they care about. "Fuck Elon Musk, boycott twitter" is an entirely valid position. "Elon Musk has turned twitter into 8chan" is an absurd falsehood.
No one is moving from Twitter to Mastodon because the latter is more accessible to people with disabilities. It's not, definitely not the main Mastodon UI (vs. 3rd party UIs).
I think the article mentioned the dismissal of Twitter's whole accessibility team as a sign that Musk has no respect or understanding of what the fired people did or why it was important. Ditto for other dismissed teams, like those researching machine learning ethics.
> An application can and should have good accessibility by default without a dedicated team
I used to think that, I used to think that understanding accessibility was a part of doing a good job on front-end so people who care about doing a good job will address it. Now I think formal and informal education about is so bad about not including accessibility concerns as a part of creating interfaces that there's too much for people to unlearn. Everyone has some responsibility for the accessibility of the final product but few will give it enough time or consideration.
Additionally, if an application is big enough to have a team working on it, that means there are some specialists in a variety of areas. With sufficient team size, that should include accessibility specialists who know what the right thing to do is or conduct research to make a decision about what the right thing to do is.
Not really: the implication there is that people who need additional accessibility work are not users. The UX of a system is the sum totality of the experience of all users of the system, regardless of their needs.
If UX is the sum totality of the experience of all users of the system, it can be significantly better for most users but worse for a small number. I’ve never used the app so I have no idea, I’m just saying UX is more than accessibility, so you can have a great UX for most people while being useless for others.
There's an error showing on the page [an error occurred while processing this directive] which I'm pretty sure I've seen before with WordPress but I'm guessing it's not using that.
But now I'm curious does anyone know what stack or cms they're using? All built and managed in house?
A cursory glance shows Apache. Akamai for their CDN. Sentry for tracking. Years ago Apple used to use Script.aculo.us and Prototype, but of course that was ages ago. They seem to have an internal CSS framework they use, as well as custom JavaScript per-page, in-house iconography, and a many-years-old page architecture with component names like the globalnav and globalfooter. They have an internal package org called "marcom" which is short for Apple Marketing Communications.
Over the years, I've watched their front-end change but for the most part, their page architecture has stayed the same. It's actually really nice from the point of view that they got something right, and didn't screw around with it every single year like how most front end web developers seem to do for the sake of doing it.
Their web pages, along with some of the other high class work on say, Awwwards, are a masterclass example of learning from top talent.
3 hours down so far and no notification on the login page, no explanation in the status to say they have diagnosed the issue and no eta for a fix is very very poor for a service of this type. Particularly annoying as I have an invoice to create.
One of the first global accounting saas providers. Forced Intuit to rapidly improve their cloud services but have failed to gain significant market share in the US.
