I've actually had a really positive experience using a smart thermostat. The main benefit is having a temperature schedule, which my previous dumb thermostat didn't have. It's also handy being able to adjust the temperature from my phone whenever I'd like to. I find controlling it by voice kind of pointless. On the phone, you can easily see what it's currently at, then adjust it for the next e.g. hour, after which it'll switch back to the default schedule.
I agree being able to change the temperature settings from a phone would be convenient, but they've had "smartish" thermostats capable of relatively complex temperature schedules for at least 20 years.
No need for an internet connection or mega corp data collections.
can smartish ones detect when you leave home and turn down the heat until you get back? My nest can. This is great because my schedule is not the same every day.
Most dumb thermostats also have next-hour-override functionality, though I will say I had a Nest at a previous house and also thought it was pretty decent. In particular, it was nice being able to turn it way down when going away, but then crank it back up when heading home but still 30 mins away.
You don’t really need anything “smart” for this. This is basically simple remote with timer. My $50 thermostat has adjustable schedule with override capability. No machine learning needed. The only thing that’s missing is the phone capability but I think that would be easy to add.
Totally agree. I still don’t get the appeal of “smart” whatevers.
> No machine learning needed
Now this reminded me of the windows 10 update announcement proudly declaring that they were going to start using ‘machine learning’ to figure out if you were using your computer to minimise the disruption from their automatic updating. I’m still baffled by it. Why not solve the actual problem at hand - updates being really slow, risky/buggy, settings altering, and very disruptive even when scheduled, and users not having enough control over updating? I’m pretty sure ‘machine learning’ isn’t needed to determine whether a computer is being used.
So that all the employees and major stakeholders don't dump stock on day 1 and tank the price, often permanently affecting the company's perception in the eyes of investors
I don't think it's solely the "price-tanking", it ties them to the company for a while.
i.e. If I was an investor looking to buy, I'd be a bit worried if the dev team would all be made instant millionaires on the day I bought in, with no incentive aside from salary to carry on working. You might find you'd just bought shares in an empty office.
I created something similar which I no longer work on (but keep running on a maintenance-type basis). Feel free to be inspired/take features or just compare with another approach.
Isn’t this quite similar to what happens when a supermarket creates their own brand version of a product, and places it alongside the copies product, albeit with a much cheaper price?
I felt quite bad for Spotify and Flux when Apple Music and Night shift came out, but I guess this is a risk when you use any type of platform to reach customers.
Diversification is a good idea, I’m impressed was impressed with the response in the article.
Supermarkets rarely "create their own brand version of a product." They usually contact a a vendor to have them make the product with the house brand's labels.
Trader Joe's does this, and some googling will tell you who really makes some of their products. Costco is known for rebranding some impressively good single malt scotches and selling them cheap.
I think the whole argument of "unicorns exploiting legal grey areas" falls victim to Hanlon's razor. I don't really believe these companies set out to bend or break any laws, it was more a case of the legal system not catching up fast enough. Uber started as a service to hire limousines, not a platform company.
If governments weren't so concerned with party politics, infighting and staving off populist surges, we'd probably have a proper definition for a "gig economy" worker by now. A definition that would allow them to keep the flexibility that they appreciate so much, whilst still having proper worker protections for sick pay, holidays and all the rest.
It's strange that you explicitly brought up Uber and still hold this opinion. Out of all the companies, they have most aggressively skirted labour laws in every country they are in, and have been selectively banned from some countries and cities due to their continual breaking of the law. Not to mention lobbying efforts to minimise the effects of labour laws.
They didn't start as a company for the sole purpose of exploiting legal grey areas, but they certainly have consistently done so since their inception.
I've decided to renounce the web after more than 7 years as a professional web developer. My current plan is to see if I can transition to making Swift apps for Apple devices instead.
This was partly triggered by the recent news that Google is taking aim at ad-blockers in Chrome. I doubt I would have ever wanted to go into web development if I knew what the web of 2019 would look like without ad-blockers.
A couple things drew me to the web.
1. You could write a site once, and it would work (pretty much) in any browser.
2. The dev experience of being able to instantly see changes was great.
3. It was easier than app development.
After dipping into some recent WWDC videos, I was impressed to see how far app development had come.
1. With SwiftUI, you can learn once, and build apps for pretty much any Apple device.
2. The dev experience is great with instant live previews (in the beta version of Mac OS Catalina).
3. SwiftUI is very easy to reason about, particularly when coming from a component-based architecture framework such as React or Angular.
At this point, waiting for an "app-like" experience for web apps feels a bit like waiting for the year of the linux desktop.
Progressive Web Apps have come far, but they still have a long way to go, particularly in "feeling" like a native app experience. When interruptible animations are introduced, I'll give them another look.
For a long time, the web had the perception of a free and open democratiser, but it's become completely commercialised. It's a petri dish for privacy violations. Why has my ad-blocker stopped 18,000 trackers in the two months since I've had it running?
I want to make tools, not marketing funnels. Apps that follow Apple's suit will encrypt user data so that not even the app maker can view user data. When was the last time you saw that on the web?
Yeah when web apps started to take off, circa 2000 I'd say, the big selling point was the ease of deployment and update and the ability to have a single code base for multiple OS's. Also, up to that point application installation mostly consisted of going down to uber electronics store and buying a box with the app burned on a CD.
However, not too much later I found many instances of mom, pop, buddy and sis having no troubles downloading and installing apps like iTunes and, ironically, web browsers; regardless of their operating system. Also, these installed apps phoned home to keep themselves up to date.
Fast forward 10-15 years later and there's a significant increase in internet traffic but the increase is do to thick clients on mobile devices and now it's the same issues as before; how to package and deploy on multiple platforms and maintain a single code base. But the thing to not is users don't seem to mind installing and uninstalling apps if the interface they're using makes it easy.
And that brings us to present day where mobile development has pretty much ditched web apps but desktop development is still holding on to web apps. And it's rather hilarious to watch the schizophrenic evolution of web app technology over time regarding who much of the code to put on the client vs the server.
All that to say, I agree; technologies exist to build multi-platform client applications that reach back to servers for data if they need to. And I wish the whole application in a browser thing would just die and browser would return to what they were designed for, displaying hypertext.
All of the problems in the article are caused by corporations trying to maximise profit. This has turned you off developing for a decentralised platform and instead to one under complete control of one corporation.
This company also uses that control granted to it to:
- Force a cut of all payments through them
- Promote their own services and software above all else
- Ban protocols they don't approve of (The decentralised web never would have been made if Apple had their current dominance with their current strategies)
For this corporate dominance the user cannot remove or modify anything they don't like about the app they're using (remove annoyances, make highly calculated addicting software less so, improve accessibility).
Why would you trust some corporation to look after your content into the future. At least with Sketch I know I can continue to use the software after my subscription expires. These companies are only one takeover away from jacking up their prices or removing a little used feature that is crucial to you.
As a fellow web developer, I want to offer a different viewpoint. Firstly, the pros that you listed for the web are equally valid today as they were 7 years ago. But additionally, I want to push back a bit against the "app-ifiction" of the web. I see the web as its own platform, and trying to implement "native" features on it seems counter productive. The web has features which are completely native to it, which are either very difficult, or downright impossible to replicate on Android and iOS apps (proper URL's, standardisations etc., just to give some examples off the top of my head). And yet no one seems to be complaining about that. I understand that this argument comes across as a what-about-ism, but I do genuinely think that the web platform is different, and should be approached on its own terms, rather than trying to mimic an Android or an iOS app experience.
On a higher level, as web developers, I think it is worth remembering that we don't have to build these half broken app experiences. We can still build web sites. We can still open a simple index.html file, put in some markup, and voila, it renders on the browser. We can choose not to implement all the trackers, invasive ads, broken "personalisation" algorithms etc. The fact that these things are implemented on all websites nevertheless is not because of some technical failure of the web platform. I believe it's a human problem of organisational politics, where the business users want these features, and overrule any objections that the developers might have regarding privacy or performance. Additionally, Android and iOS apps also implement these tracking features, with numerous SDK's available to create these marketing funnels that you mentioned. They may not be visible as an ugly badge icon in the top right corner showing how many were blocked, but they are definitely there. At the end of the day, the business/client that we are working for is asking for these things, and we can either try to educate them against these features, cave in and implement these functionalities, or move to a different organization/team/project more in line with our view points. But we cannot solve this with a technical solution like changing platforms.
Finally, regarding the perception that the web is a free and open democratiser, isn't it still one? I can still spin up a web server not hosted on one of the cloud platforms to host and serve my content. Yes, discoverability, scaling etc., are problems, but that's true for practically everything from social media, to e-commerce. Again, from a technical perspective, nothing is stopping us from developing websites or even web apps which are not beholden to commercial and centralised interests. Again, we don't do it, because of "IRL" reasons which don't really have any good technical solutions. In fact, going into the highly controlled and regulated environments of Apple's iOS, and to lesser extent Google's Android, sounds like the exact opposite of free and open.
That being said, if you find that you like working on iOS or Android apps, or you want to build apps which leverage the strengths of those platforms, then go ahead and I hope enjoy it!
It's a Chrome extension & web app for highlighting bits you read online. Then it generates flashcards for you to review on a spaced repetition-type schedule. No Firefox extension yet, but shouldn't be hard to port over.
Very interesting read, quite impressed with the other experiment proposals.
Vocabify is a tool to help you remember the words you come across. It uses a basic implementation of spaced repetition to help you remember the words and phrases you add.
Having Polar sync with Anki is an interesting idea, thinking about it now, I might have been able to get further with my own tool by leveraging Anki as well. Food for thought.
> Vocabify is a tool to help you remember the words you come across. It uses a basic implementation of spaced repetition to help you remember the words and phrases you add.
Cool idea. I suggest improving the onboarding experience of your product dramatically with minimal effort by adding this sentence to your site. Like so: https://snag.gy/iqOlFC.jpg
I can remember a specific time where I complimented a stranger. I was probably around sixteen or seventeen. A young lady was sitting in front of me on the bus and obviously quite nervous. I noticed that she would repeatedly dig in to her handbag, get out her makeup, make the smallest adjustment to her face, then put her makeup away again. She must have done this four or five times, putting the entire makeup box away and getting it out again each time. I told myself if she does it one more time, I’ll say something. Lo and behold she starts to get her makeup out again, so I tapped her on the shoulder. She spun round, and I said “You’re pretty enough.”
She beamed me a huge smile, sheepishly said thank you and wished me a good day when she got off the bus.
Yep, it’s definitely tricky gauging when and how to complement a stranger. I find it quite fun complimenting my friends and acquaintances. It’s really just quite funny to see a person’s reaction to a completely “curveball” type compliment that you throw at them out of the blue.
