> What's the elevator pitch, one more time?" One ownership rule for memory, threads, and networks. No garbage collector, no complex borrow checker, and no network errors.

Should be the header.

Interesting how many accidents with plausible deniability all those companies with a horse in the cybersecurity race had occured lately.

Tin foil hat me wants to call for "capability demo for at worse the cheap price of an out-of-court settlement".

Or for cheaper, you can sail the high sea. You build a collection of music, movies and games that will last you a lifetime for free. Then you can spend the saved money on supporting artists you like, studios you respect or buy a locked on guilty pleasure once in a while.

No reason to play by the rules if decency is not in the picture anymore.

I always wanted to do local and offline first app with optional sync, but the difference in amount of work is just stagering.

Now with LLM to do the boiler plate of event logs, healing, retries and testing all that, it's finally reasonable for a side projet.

And the result is great, the UI is reactive, it works in malls with bad signal, you get a no account experience almost for free...

I do all my apps like that now.

The problem with native apps are the app stores and their requirements. For true cross-platform, you need to develop for 5 platforms (macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android), each with their own technology, favored programming language and ecosystem, deployment, certificates, regulations, requirements, guidelines, arbitrary app review policies, categories, etc. I'm doing that currently and it's madness.

IMHO, it would be best if developers all over the world boycotted proprietary platforms entirely. (Of course, this is never going to happen, I'm just saying.)

> it would be best if developers all over the world boycotted proprietary platforms entirely.

Note that Linux and Android, from your list, are open source.

> For true cross-platform, you need to develop for 5 platforms

I would argue that anyway, you should develop for multiple "kinds of devices". Writing the same code for a desktop computer and a smartphone is fundamentally a mistake: I don't want to slide big buttons with my mouse.

So first, you need to design the UI multiple times: for desktop, for smartphones, and for tablets. If you want a smart watch, you need another design for it. Web apps don't solve that better.

Second, if you can write a webapp that works everywhere, then you can write a native app that works everywhere. I don't see how that would be different. The problem is generally that if you run the exact same code everywhere, then it's not a good experience.

Android is closed-source but with some open-source components, for only some of which they'll actually follow the license and give you the source code.

AOSP means "Android Open Source Project". You can get the sources of Android, modify them, and build the whole OS. The Android SDK is open source as well.

GrapheneOS is based on Android precisely because Android is open source. They couldn't do that with iOS, or Windows, or any proprietary OS. Same for LineageOS.

Honestly it seems like you don't really know what you are talking about here?

AOSP isn't Android. Nor is the Android SDK.

Also you can totally fork iOS, in binary form, on the dark web, and run it somewhere that isn't an iPhone.

Ok teach me. What is Android?

Not OP but are you saying the google's "Android" OS, which comes installed in smartphones that aren't called iphone, is open source? because it is not. There is an open source version of it which is not the one you have access when you buy a phone.

No. The "OS" part of "Android" is AOSP, period.

What runs in your phone is AOSP, with some firmware blobs (many of which are proprietary), with some system apps that may be proprietary (like Play Services and Play Store or whatever the OEM adds). If you need to convince yourself, try to build AOSP and run it.

The OP is just trying to derail the discussion. Would you say that Linux is not open source because the Linux you run on your computer most likely has to run some proprietary blobs? Or that Linux is not an OS because Linux is a kernel? What would it bring to the question of "are there open source OSes out there?", really?

I'd say SteamOS is not open source IF SteamOS was not open source (but it is). The Android that google ships to phones isn't open source the same way the Google Chrome browser isn't open source either. To the license level. This is quite obvious, not sure if you don't understand or simple don't agree (and prefer to be wrong).

Do you even know where the discussion comes from? After enumerating "macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android", it was said:

> it would be best if developers all over the world boycotted proprietary platforms entirely.

I noted that Linux and Android are open source.

To which I got the answer:

> Android is closed-source but with some open-source components, for only some of which they'll actually follow the license and give you the source code.

Now please explain me how "they only follow the licence and give you the source code for some open-source components of Android" is obvious, and how I choose to be wrong when I say that the full goddamn OS is open source, not because Google follows the licence (because they don't have to, they own the codebase) but because Google chooses to publish it. There are many reasons for that and I hate Google as much as the next person, but the fact remains that the Android OS is open source.

So back to the original point where "developers should boycott proprietary platforms", I don't think that Linux and Android should be boycotted. Developers should use and support open source Android systems like GrapheneOS and LineageOS (which they generally have no idea about) instead of boycotting them.

Android is a good proprietary platform so locked that in the near future it'll be impossible to "sideload" apps (install apps without Google first allow it). Google Android isn't open source.

It can be open source and locked.

Android is an open source OS: you can take the sources, compile them, run them on your phone and you will have a fully functional OS.

Because it is open source does not mean that nobody can make a proprietary product out of it.

I dare you to buy a random Android phone and try to get the source code for the GPU driver that will compile and match the functionality of what's installed on the device.

This is not what open source means.

It's exactly what open source mean.

I don't know if you are trying to defend that "Android is not an open source OS" or if you are trying to play on words like the other poster?

The best open source mobile OS you can get nowadays is based on AOSP, where the A means "Android". Sure, there are people who make proprietary products out of that. But it doesn't mean that Android is not an open source OS. The OS part, again, is open source. Even the Android SDK is open source.

AOSP is not Android, or do you believe that GitHub is Git because the Git stands for Git? Or that Windows Registry Cleanup Assistant is Windows?

The "A" in "AOSP" stands for "Android". Your examples are preposterous.

It's closer to the difference between "Linux" and "GNU/Linux", which is often used by trolls like you to derail discussions. And more often than not, those who derail the discussions by saying "GNU/Linux" don't actually understand that there are mainstream Linux distributions that don't run a GNU userland, and that "GNU/Linux" is actually incorrect for whatever they are trying to say.

I can see that you probably met many people that tried to explain to you what GNU/Linux means and that Linux isn't an OS. All their effort trying to educate you was wasted.

Dude, I build Linux distros from scratch. I know what the kernel is.

I also know that natural languages are ambiguous, and that when people say "I use Linux" they mean "I use a Linux distribution". When it gets ambiguous, I know to ask "are you talking about Linux the kernel or Linux the family of OSes?", but I don't remember it happening in a constructive discussion.

My experience with people derailing the discussion to "I cannot understand when you talk about Linux as an OS, because Linux is a kernel" is that they actually do understand, but they somehow choose to derail the discussion. Interestingly, those who do that often believe that "GNU/Linux" is the right way to talk about Linux-based OSes, which I find amusing.

Many people genuinely don't understand that the Android OS (AOSP) is open source, but that the Stock Android image they receive with their phone is not. And therefore they could genuinely wonder why developers don't revolt and choose to support "an open source mobile OS". But the truth is that the best open source mobile OS is AOSP-based, it is part of the "Android" family when we use natural languages constructively.

And for some reason, there are people like you who seem to love talking endlessly about whether or not is it correct to say "Android" for "Android-based" or "Android Open Source Project", and probably also love to annoy people saying "GNU/Linux" even if the OS in question is actually not using the GNU userland.

A child can still access knives if the parents don't care.

Also, they may be serving static files through Django. Otherwise, it's really, really low.

Yeah let's block port 80, too many people expose unprotected api.

This is what several cellular ISP to (block ports <1024 and 5555) to protect the users on IPv6.

You can unlock it with additional free option.

Also the results given it the article are still worse than redis with zero work and no risk of breaking later, both in nb of req and latency.

And you can move redis to another server next later if needed to split the db and notification load.

I don't know, I tried kagi but it doesn't seem to have superior results to even ddg. It's even worse for non english content.

ChatGPT is better than their agent at everything, firefox extensions can filter domains and ads out of the search results while preventing tracking nand I don't even have to create an account for any of those.

Not to mention I actually mostly use search engines to for stuff that are not fuzzy anymore (since discovery with them are now terrible anyway), so I don't get that much value.

I really want to like kagi, it ticks all the boxes, but it misses a killer feature that would make me use it instead of alternatives that just do what I need.

I downvoted up out of reflex, then read till the and went back to upvote.

Courageous game you are playing here.