background downloads often hang forever and never run
apps get killed in the background so aggressively that iOS
effectively doesn’t offer multitasking anymore
… continuing the iOS 13 pattern of breaking long-held basic
functionality. I’m sure Apple has good excuses about why their
software quality is so shitty again. I hear the same thing over
and over from people inside: they aren’t given enough time to
Your software quality is broken, Apple. Deeply, systemically
broken. Get your shit together.
This bug where apps are getting killed soon after they’re backgrounded is driving me nuts. Start a YouTube video in Safari, switch to another app, go back to Safari — and the video loads from scratch and starts from the beginning.
Public health officials for years have urged Americans to
limit consumption of red meat and processed meats because of
concerns that these foods are linked to heart disease, cancer
and other ills.
But on Monday, in a remarkable turnabout, an international
collaboration of researchers produced a series of analyses
concluding that the advice, a bedrock of almost all dietary
guidelines, is not backed by good scientific evidence.
Speaking of un-Mac-like apps, Pandora released a Mac client today. I downloaded it just to kick the tires — it’s a bad native Mac app even by the low standards of Electron apps.
If Marzipan can get more companies to build their Mac apps from their iOS app, that really would be an improvement over these Electron monstrosities. But part of the appeal of Electron is that it gives you an app that works on Windows too. (Pandora’s Windows app isn’t available yet, but is promised soon.) Marzipan won’t solve that problem.
As with all cross-platform UI frameworks, it requires some amount of compromise. There's nothing wrong with that, just that there will be compromise. If having one codebase is the most important thing, then making that compromise probably makes sense.
• Amid mounting public pressure to address Jones’ hate speech, Apple’s Tim Cook and Eddy Cue met over the weekend and decided to pull five of Jones’ podcasts from their platform, sources familiar with the matter told me.
• Cook and Cue decided to let Jones’ InfoWars app remain available in the app store because they felt it did not run afoul of their policy. […]
• Zuckerberg only moved to remove these pages after learning about Apple’s decision, Facebook sources said. That is why the pages were removed at 3 a.m. Pacific Time.
• YouTube’s Susan Wojcicki and Spotify’s Daniel Ek similarly moved to ban some of Jones’ content only after learning about Apple’s decision.
• There was no coordination between Apple, Facebook and any of the other tech firms, sources familiar with the matter said. The decisions were made independently.
Assuming Byers’s reporting is solid, there we have it: Apple led the way.
Note: In this post I’m pretty lazy about my use of the words “system” and “systemic”. Stick with me…
Take a situation like having too much work in progress/process.
That situation can trigger problems.
What starts as a fairly common intuition trap, can end up causing confidence in people and process to drop. When confidence drops, you start to see other problems.
These problems — defensiveness, opacity, and micro-management — can feel intensely personal. Taken to the extreme, these are the types of work experiences that cause people to leave companies AND cause people to be let go (or smoked out) of companies. So you have…
…a relatively benign and common trap (high work in progress, which frankly is pretty straightforward to address) leading to entrenched people issues.
It is in vogue (in some circles) to claim that “most problems are systemic!” And then mention Deming…
Deming would evoke disbelief in his management seminars when he insisted that 94 percent or more of all problems, defective goods or services came from the system, not from a careless worker or a defective machine. He would go on to say that to improve an organization’s goods or services, the system had to be improved rather than searching for the guilty worker or broken equipment. Top managers in America’s leading companies were dubious students. But, in almost all cases, when they implemented his ideas, they were surprised to find that they agreed with him: The management and the system they were managing were the true source of both problems and improvements.
Which is all well and good, but sort of ignores an important point…systemic issues can cause people to act in shitty and self-destructive ways.
I’d argue that left unchecked the people issues become THE PROBLEM. Does it matter that the root cause was high WIP? Maybe if you catch things early enough — hurray for visualizing work and having limits in th first place — but not once the gnarly people issues have become entrenched. It doesn’t matter. Lowering WIP limits will not, in isolation, solve the (new) underlying problems. Would this repair a relationship?
You know all those times I was being a jerk and not trusting you … that was because the high WIP dude. I come in peace. It was the WIP that did it.
Does viewing this diagram make it all better?
To some people, yes. They’ll say something like…
Oh wow, I can see how all these small issues can add up to something super crappy.
But not to others…
So you’re basically saying we’re all fucked.
And WE are in the right, of course. What tends to happen is that we absolve our own bad behavior — oh, that was the system — while continuing to blame others for specifics (well, she SHOULD have known better).
Fundamental Attribution Error: The tendency for people to over-emphasize personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of situational influences on the same behavior (see also actor-observer bias, group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).
What you are left with is classic conflict escalation and de-escalation. If we’re stuck trying to punish what we view as shitty behavior in others, then we are liable to take a scorched earth approach (often destroying whatever reputation/trust we have in the process).
Numerous experiments have shown that individuals are willing to destroy their own resources in order to sanction another person’s unkind or unfair behavior.
Our normal instincts to “freeze, fight, or flee” simply escalate the conflict. Peace requires someone to take a leap of faith…
To attain peace, players use costly signals to communicate their willingness to stop fighting. The most important signal is refraining from any investment in conflict, which implies an almost certain loss of the contest.
All this is to say that your NEW systemic issue is a wicked problem involving people behaving badly. Trust and safety must be gradually restored. Fixing the original root cause will not solve the new problem. You must de-escalate, and often in the workplace that involves small acts of collaboration and undeniable value (the “costly signals to communicate [our] willingness to stop fighting”) in the face of lingering — and very real — interpersonal issues.
I’m beginning to think that in change efforts we often don’t explicitly ask for a ceasefire / truce, or call out that the “cost of conflict is higher than the cost of reconciliation”. Doing so AND highlighting the system-level contributors, would go a long way towards a reset and the required de-escalation.
This motherfucker can’t stay out of the news. And because eSports and social media have transformed every human medium of communication into a tabloid, I can’t look anywhere without seeing it. So now, even if you have scrupulously limited your Internet access to this specific site, you still have to put up with it.
The whole thing has put me in a very philosophical mood.
There is pretty clearly a disconnect between the audience for online content and the platforms that host that content. The audience is fairly clear on this point: they’re rewarding the most extreme content they can find with viewership and direct dollars. It’s true on YouTube and it’s true on Twitch. People always think that when you make a statement of observable fact you’re supporting whatever it is, which is nonsense - we can’t grapple with things unless we name them clearly. So, let me name it: Trolls are the new Punk. You can recognize this or you can be wrong and I honestly don’t care which one you choose. Next you can disagree with me about the atomic weight of hydrogen. See where it gets you. Look, I’m not happy about it. Let’s hate this together.
I was reading the Wikipedia entry on Punk, and I was like… Writing a Wikipedia entry on Punk is probably the least Punk thing there is. Sure, maybe that’s what it meant in a specific time - ironically, or maybe just factually, it’s a very conservative, victors-writing-history sort of affair. Punk is not a type of hair. Punk is that which gnaws at the roots of Yggdrasil. So if the new countercultural force looks like Logan Paul, this eighties movie bully looking motherfucker, and if norms have shifted to the extent that utterly mainstream individuals look like punks did, well, now you know what it means to live too long.
There was the idea that the Internet was going to do away with Gatekeepers, and it did for a time, except - and if you’ve ever worked IT you know this already - technology moves in cycles of Centralization and Decentralization. So, yes. You could get a TLD and functionally speaking operate a pirate ship for awhile, but monetizing that Internet required a fair bit of sophistication. The next disruptive wave was tied not to the the raw topology of the network but on services built atop it, with monetization as an inherent feature. Now, years after the fact, they’re trying to close the barn door.
Logan Paul is making a fool of them over and over again, and perforating the platform for other creators. Now they’ve put him on timeout like the fucking child he is. They can stop paying him, but it doesn’t stop him getting paid. They made a kind of monster machine, with every possible lever thrown towards a caustic narcissism, and then they pretend to be fucking surprised when an unbroken stream of monsters emerge.