A lot of the backend bucket providers can handle file versioning.
I too would like the answer to this concern because the features page doesn’t mention it. I want to be able to handle file version history.
I’m currently using Filen which I find very reasonable and, critically, it has a Linux client. But I wish it was faster and I wish the local file explorer integration was more like Dropbox where it is seamless to the OS rather than the current setup where you mount a network share.
The blog author isn’t understanding it but it’s quite simple: the product only matters in the context of large enterprise customers.
The large customers still get what they want as long as the ask isn’t too big and that’s why you see new features even though the product is in maintenance mode.
I love how this thread is talking about bad policy without even discussing any aspect of the policy that is bad.
Perhaps we should pull our heads out of the Fox News punch bowl to take a breath.
Y’all act like democratic socialist policy can’t work even though we’ve spent the last entire history of our country trying the exact opposite strategy only to have it not work out at all. The current status quo which is obviously not satisfactory didn’t come from socialists or leftists running the country.
Cue the “This is the world under communism” memes that are literally pictures of the current world under unfettered under-regulated capitalism.
The boogeyman of “the businesses will move out of NYC” is hilariously out of touch. Where will all these companies get the employees they depend on if they move operations to Kansas? NYC contains nearly the entire population of Ohio within its boroughs. Where do you propose these companies find employees if they all leave NYC?
You’re making the classic business bootlicking mistake of flipping the needs pyramid upside down. We don’t need to beg for businesses to stick around, businesses literally depend on regular working class people to survive. They are worthless without our labor and our dollars as customers.
Apparently the rich have already been moving out of NYC: from 2010 to 2022 the percent of people in the US with $1+ million in federal taxable income dropped from 6% to 4% [1]. A whole bunch left during the pandemic (unsurprisingly), according to [2], but it did not say if they came back afterwards. These aren't great articles, just the first that DDG gave me, but it suggests that there may actually be a trend.
Your first link is an opinion article from the NY Post, I would not consider that to be unbiased reporting (really, we should not be using the opinion section of any newspaper for any of this).
Second link is a financial industry-oriented source, one I've never heard of in any journalistic capacity, and I am not so sure about their motivations to write an article like that.
For example:
> Quality of Life: Rising crime and strained infrastructure.
I would also make the argument that primary residence and income tax optimization tricks mean that many of these people with very high incomes still spend a lot of time if not most of their time in NYC. If you're making $1+ million a year in W2 income you most definitely own more than one property and are probably important enough in your work to be able to restructure your income to keep it out of NY State income tax collection. Get paid in stock options, or send your paycheck down to your Florida condo and totally live there 6 months out of the year.
People did move out of NYC and companies did move HQs out to NJ and elsewhere.
NYC lost pop during the eighties and didn’t recover its population till 2000. It was an 10% decline in pop[1]. They went from 125 F500 cos based in NYC down to 61 by 1986. Maybe that’s okay with you if it were to repeat but that’s a lot of a tax base leaving for better pastures.
It's important to discuss the reasons for the population dropping in the 1980s and subsequently recovering.
It didn't experience population drops because NYC scared away the businesses and billionaires/millionaires with left-leaning policy. That population loss happened because of macroeconomic trends that were already in motion, as well as local factors that really had very little to do with who was mayor at the time.
Detroit didn't have a population collapse because of who was mayor or what the tax rate on the local businesses was.
It had to do with the economy. The city was going broke and the city was levying more taxes while the city failed to make the environment attractive to companies and individuals. Koch was corrupt, Dinkins inept and it took tough DAs and mayor to clean up crime and make it more livable. They cleaned up most of the mob, some of the graffiti, went after hooligans, made train surfing less attractive and voila, people saw opportunity.
Anyway many fortune 500s left the city from the late 70s to late 80s. NYC sucked.
What’s there to be skeptical about? It’s well known and data-confirmed that wealth has been transferred out of the middle and lower classes in the last half century or so.
The people who are making below the median make things work by living in public or rent controlled housing, getting a heck of a lot of roommates, or living in single room apartments with shared bathrooms.
Unless the lower half is getting by via overcrowding (living in a small apartment with a large number of roommates or extended family), supplemental nutrition assistance, rent control, etc.
The common example given is how Walmart is the largest employer of people on SNAP in the USA, which equates to corporate welfare. Walmart is directly receiving taxpayer dollars since they don't need to pay employees a living wage.
I’m extremely skeptical that well over half of NYC households are in such dire straits.
But even if that’s the case, it doesn’t say “to live alone” or “to live without government assistance.” It just says “to live.”
I don’t think having roommates or a rent-controlled apartment is so terrible that it wouldn’t qualify as “living.” It doesn’t have to be completely literal. If it meant not being homeless, I could work with that. But a number that’s more than 50% higher than the median? I don’t know what the heck it means “to live” in that case. It clearly means something well beyond what the average New Yorker actually has, but I don’t know what and I don’t know why you’d call that “living.”
I thought the first sentence was "Get unlimited access for just $1.99 your first month." Or maybe "We've updated our terms."
Anyway, I don't trust media summaries of reports. The bit of the article I can see mentions two new reports, but I can only see a link to one, which is three years old.
That report lists a $125,814/year "cost of meeting basic needs" for the lowest amount of any borough, which fits the headline. But that figure is also based on having one preschool child, which according to the report costs $33,000 for child care. Lots of families don't, so their figure would be substantially less. The report says that 46% of working-age NYC households fall below the True Cost of Living, which certainly doesn't fit with that cost being so much higher than the median income, even considering the "working-age" qualifier.
The 2023 edition of the report has a lot more details: https://selfsufficiencystandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/.... If I'm reading that right, they're calculating housing costs at the 40th percentile in a given area, which doesn't make any sense when calculating the minimum needed. In this case, the areas are entire boroughs, or borough halves for Manhattan and Brooklyn.
I see this kind of nonsense all over the place. Random example: https://www.investopedia.com/minimum-wage-earners-can-not-co.... "There are no major American cities that hold an average monthly rental cost which is 30% of a minimum wage earner's gross income." OK, why would we compare the minimum wage with the average rent? If you want to find out what people can afford, you need to look at the lowest available cost, not the average.
So, I remain skeptical of the claim made by this article.
IDK, it kind of sounds like from the article's own prose that Project Reunion / WinUI 3 is an overall good thing and that Microsoft actually does have a pretty good vision for the past 5 years at least.
From a user's perspective, I don't really see where the problem is. All my apps look like Windows apps to me, and I also think that includes apps that do their own thing and look their own way. For as long as Windows has been around we've had apps that just don't follow the rules, from RealPlayer to WinZip to iTunes to Spotify.
This idea that all applications must be consistent with each other on one platform is generally a good idea but the downside of not having it that way is not very tangible to most users.
E.g., Steam looks different than every other Windows app. Same with Spotify and Slack and Discord. How does that negatively impact users? Well, not really at all. The consistency is within those apps themselves. I'm comfortable with Steam because I've been using it for 20 years and it's evolved on its own terms.
I could see it being an accessibility problem, but can't figure out any other potential downside.
I also don't think any other platforms have this figured out. See the window corners in macOS Tahoe. Remember how Mac Catalyst apps first looked when that came out? They didn't follow OS conventions at all. Remember when Final Cut Pro 6 didn't look anything like a Mac app? Or GarageBand etc. and their skeuomorphic looks? Linux is no better with a mix of desktop environments, Wayland versus Xorg, etc. Then we look at mobile apps and it's one of the least consistent environments imaginable: you've got a mix of native and frameworks like React Native and Flutter and the rest.
I don't know if I would call this the new age of AI propaganda as much as I would call this "unserious, unprofessional, unqualified, authoritarian leaders would rather deceive their support base than offer serious policy solutions to societal problems."
We can notice in this article the conspicuous absence of the mature adults in the room using these tactics. We don't see a whole lot of party-sponsored AI memes trying to sell universal healthcare, enhanced public services and education, ending poverty and homelessness, addressing cost of living crisis, ending gasoline dependency, etc.
It's the age of AI propaganda for people with no good ideas, because AI is a substitute for good ideas.
OP wasn't ripped off, OP just forgot to define their contract. Like, entirely.
Nobody forced OP to work 11-14 hour days. Contracting 101 stipulates that you define your hours ahead of time. You come in, you provide your expertise, and you leave at the end of the day. Let the client's junior employees work long hours. Not your problem.
OP brought their own equipment, which is totally fine but "who provides equipment" is also in the contract from the start. OP should have made a list of equipment that the client will require to complete such a project and stipulate a client budget be set aside to cover any shortcomings as they arise.
The contract is where you define when you get paid. "Deposit is XYZ quantity, non-refundable. Contractor will be paid for the upcoming week in advance by X date. Failure to remit payment will halt work."
I understand that the point of this blog piece is that it was a learning experience for OP but this stuff is pretty obvious isn't it? This is pretty much what comes up when you google stuff like "how to get into freelance contracting." I'm shocked and feel bad for OP for letting things get this far. Sadly, they were not ripped off by anyone but themselves.
These types of situations are endemic to my industry, for better or worse. I wasn't intending to complain about the working conditions by way of making it seem as though any of those things were unusual — I was providing that context by way of saying I conducted myself as a professional does in these situations. I've been in this (immersive, interactive, creative tech) industry for 20 years and those conditions are absolutely expected onsite when commissioning, installing, or preparing for a live event. Refusing to work beyond say an 8-10 hour day would leave the project unfinished and we work on a 'show must go on basis'. With that said, doing this for 20+ days without a break is unusually grueling, even for this industry.
Before I start with my real comment I'll point out that the AI slop images really detract from this article and the author should stop.
To be fair to America here, it's pretty well served overall and is doing a lot better than the past. Average speeds are at around 100 Mbps with extremely widespread advanced 5G networks doing even better than that.
Cellular in particular is an area where the USA still seems to be ahead of most places, although they certainly pay for it. (Even that has gotten way, way better. I'm getting really nice MVNO service with unlimited data and even a decent unlimited tethering plan for less than $30/month)
25 Gigabit is nice but that's so expensive on the client device side to the point where it's basically unattainable for any consumer. Your average consumer primarily uses the Internet via WiFi devices that might max out at 300Mbps practical speeds or lower depending on when they purchased their devices and WiFi access point and their distance from it.
Then you've got the problem of the speed on the other end. 25Gb fiber is great until you realize that the server you are downloading from is only going to give you 1/100th a lot of the times.
I haven't even mentioned the fact that you're now adding CPU and SSD bottlenecks to the equation. I'm pretty sure 25Gb/s is higher than the maximum write speed on my SSD.
I have gigabit fiber at home and the ability to buy faster speeds from my ISP but I find the idea totally pointless when that means I would have to buy $500 in networking equipment (if not more) and possibly rewire my home (currently sketchy Cat 5e that seems to be installed poorly and I'm lucky to have that). I even have the latest WiFi 7 from a highly reputable prosumer brand along with very new WiFi 7 and 6E 6Ghz client devices but the highest speed I see using those devices where I want to use them is around 600Mbps.
Only the images? The entire article is pure AI slop. But no one even cares anymore... People seem to love this kind of empty text, or no one even reads anymore, or everyone here is a bot already... Who knows.
I spent 4 days on it and the video I made to go along with it with me speaking every word. The video has no AI, it is all stock video and audio footage which I pain stackenly stiched together in DaVinci Resolve.
I used AI to spell check and fix my ESL grammer in the article. Initially I also generated a number of unnecessary AI images which I removed again. I only left the ones that explain certain things like the p2p model.
reply