I for one, am absolutely fascinated with Tron Legacy. It was the first Tron movie I saw as a kid in middle school. In some ways, it's responsible for the trajectory of my career.
Apart from the obvious reasons about the DP soundtrack and the visuals, I love the theme of chasing perfection and the way it backfires.
Kevin Flynn says to CLU in the end "The thing about perfection, is that it's unknowable. You don't know that because I didn't know it when I created you" and I love the fact that it says how we can put our best and our worst into what we create. That we're not just responsible for lifeless machines, that it's more than that. And it's a hauntingly beautiful thought.
Watching these bland presentations with choreographed delivery and reading off a prompt off-screen (I'm not completely sure they're doing this, but it looks like it) makes me appreciate Steve Jobs presentations from the past so much more.
Steve really had product presentations down. I wish people at least tried to copy him.
People have definitely tried. Like Sinofsky when he announced the Surface Laptop several years ago. Or countless founders announcing their stuff. Steve was an absolute natural at the keynote and tech demo. Some people are just born like that, I think.
It is not simply just born like that. Even though he was extremely talented.
Steve practice his speech and keynote way more than any others. Once you have talent + hardwork it is hard to replicate. But even taking out the talent itself, none of the keynote are prepped to the details of what Steve would do.
In Steve's view. They probably don't give a damn about product marketing.
Jobs understood sales in a way that no one else running these tech demos/keynotes seem to. Specifically "show, don't tell."
Look at the MacBook Air launch. Jobs didn't have to say anything about how thin it was, or list product dimensions on a spec sheet. He just pulled it out of an envelope.
Likewise with the iPod. "1,000 songs in your pocket" not "It has a real hard drive with 5GB of storage."
> Jobs didn't have to say anything about how thin it was
"What is the MacBook Air? In a sentence, it's the world's thinnest notebook". [1] Then goes about listing product weight and dimensions of competitors. Granted he then visually compared the thinness, but still listed numbers.
THEN he mentioned the envelope and pulled it out... Then more specs (in the Apple style like it looks good, has a multi-touch trackpad, etc, followed by actual HDD/SDD size, and CPU spec available).
Masterfully done and well-presented regardless!
AND the product was right then and there and he could demo it and use it live
This is AI-maxing bleeding into everything. “Make me a great conference presentation”, and this is roughly what you get. AI-nshittification writ large. It’s sad to watch.
He just... highlighted Avatar. He clicked the dropdown menu, and then he randomly selected Papyrus. Like a...Like a thoughtless child just wandering by a garden, just yanking leaves along the way.
Thanks for whoever preserved these! The CartoonNetwork website was one of my most fondest memories from my childhood.
These days the official website redirects to their YouTube channel which I feel is very sad. There used to be places for kids on the internet, now everything is heading towards major platforms which I honestly feel is going to be damaging the youth in the long term.
Who are their highly funded closed-source competitors they claim Warp cannot beat on price?
Warp is the only closed source terminal product I know of. Most other popular terminal emulators are open source already.
I feel like their funding is drying up and this is their last ditch effort to have the "community" build their product for them.
They claim agents will run the show, with inputs from community in the form of ideas/specs/direction. I wonder how long that will be sustainable for given the subsidized model prices are collapsing as we speak.
Is this an attempt to pivot to something else while the "community" keeps their first product alive? Maybe I'm being too cynical here, but I don't see this as an act of good faith, especially given their roots in VC funding.
The problem description is spot on, but the solution isn't. No-one is going to sit in that chat and "collaborate" on each other's stuff in real time all day. You may as well just all sit around a screen.
I welcome the experimentation, there will definitely be something new, but this ain't it. New primitives are needed, at a higher level of conceptualization, not merely a fancy new interface.
My hobby projects have 100x more tests than they used to, because LLMs are great at writing tests. And my subjective experience is that the net quality has increased as a result.
YMMV, but it’s certainly a common belief, and for me at least a lived experience.
A lot of people believe a lot of things are true. Plenty of things that are provably false too. People will have strong convictions. People will drink deadly Koolaid because they believe in things so much.
I don't care what people believe, I care about what is. What is measurable. What is factual. I need evidence for a belief to be meaningful. I need strong evidence for a belief to be strong. Not just evidence in favor, but evidence that alternative explanations are unlikely.
Currently I see evidence that things are moving fast. But I am unable to distinguish if this is actually because of AI or because increased efforts and motivation. Most importantly, speed isn't the same thing as velocity.
What I do not see evidence for is increasing quality. In fact, I see strong evidence to the contrary. I see strong evidence that quality is declining even quicker than it was before. I'm not convinced AI is that cause of this, but there's more than adequate evidence for me to believe it is a (significant) catalyst.
Right now you could throw a stone in a random direction and there's a good chance that whatever it lands on will be decreasing in quality. It is even easy to gesture broadly at Microsoft, but they aren't the only big tech disappointing their users.
I hear a lot of claims. I don't see a lot of evidence.
It’s fair to be skeptical. Though I’d question whether the quality declines you observe (presumably with hard evidence) really just started in the past 18 months or so, such that strong correlation to AI coding tools suggests causality.
For my part, I’m too busy building to spend time quantifying quality issues in my past decade of hobby projects so I can compare to my new work, which subjectively is far more capable and higher quality.
the presenter is pretty sane, but the product is hardly a product at the current scenario. pretty much codemirror 6 collaborative editing demo + vm running claude code, with a web GUI. will fall apart with large code bases just like vscode, github codespaces and co. do, and expensive for llms to run against. Would be nice to see the foundational problems being worked on instead of regurgiting what everybody is doing.
I'm not too familiar with Warp so can someone help clarify for me:
Is Warp a terminal? Or an agent harness? Or both?
Warp as a terminal to me seems less interesting than having a well built agent harness like OpenCode that can effectively use many different models. If it's both, is there any advantage to having them be the same thing? Like, is there any way your harness can be smarter if it is also tightly integrated in your terminal? Or is it just something that Warp happens to do both of?
It's a terminal. It was a terminal before they pivoted to AI (I don't blame them, with their funding rounds I don't see them having particularly free reins) Before this, it was all about collaborative (CRDT) features. I have no idea why you'd want a terminal that is also an agent harness, but I appreciate them making it open source none the less.
reply