>Dekton cause atoms in the particles of kaolinite and quartz to diffuse across the boundaries where they touch, turning the entire thing into what amounts to a single solid mass
I'm no materials scentist, is this a physically accurate description?
Man, first Felix Reiseberg[0], then OpenCode 2.0[1], and now this in the last 24 hrs. Really giving off heavy Myst vibes. They are briefly interesting encounters, buy I deeply hope this isn't a legitimate UI trend.
It's hardly even skeuomorphism, it's a almost digital twin rendered with Phong.
A friend of mine was borrowing the shop of a very well known luthier to build some furniture. I stopped by to check the whole situation out and I found them both with their brows furrowed trying to work out some tolerances for a joint on a scrap piece of paper. As an architect by training, I quipped "at some point you'll have to start making proper drawings of you projects ahead of time", to which the luthier replied "the plans are always the problem, you're better off letting the wood tell you how it should be put it together." to which I had no reply..
Having recently had my bathroom done, I was surprised to see that none of the trades had any kind of drawing or preparation; everything was eyeballed together. Slightly less surprised when there was a catastrophic measuring error.
I have a lot of respect for the intuitive-improvisational mode, and some people can do it brilliantly while playing the violin, but I'm not sure it always works for making things.
My personal experience is that woodworking at hobby grade is a art+science+engineering in varying proportions depending on the person's interests. I can relate to your friend in that almost always, as I work through a project, it evolves in its details, joinery, design (even size as I make my mistakes) etc. However, it is important to visualise _what_ one wants in mind before beginning to mill wood. I sketch so much in various perspectives to narrow that down and try to visualise how my idea would materialise.
If AI could catalyse that first part and help visualise the idea in many perspectives that are easy to tweak and improve, I think it will be a solid base to work upon and change organically as we build it in the shop.
As an amateur wood worker, the main issue is that I can’t cut things as precise as I want. It’ll be a couple mm off, or slightly crooked, or I’ll have cut too much and need to find something to fill in the blanks.
You may call that the art part, but it’s actually the terrible skills part.
I'm with you brother/sister! I recently acquired a small hobby-grade laser cutter that can do 1/4" plywood happily and 1/2" plywood if you ask it really really nicely.
One of the things I intend on doing with it is cutting router templates for parts that I need to make a bunch of with "identical" dimensions. Get it as close as I can with the table saw and miter saw, stick the template to it, and use a flush-cut bit to clean up my slop.
It's a fun tool in its own right, I really get a kick out of designing and cutting tab-and-slot designs. They just fit together so beautifully right off the laser. I get the joy of designing the project and assembling the project without the swearing/frustration bit in the middle.
The grandfather of one of my son's friends was a locally-noted woodcarver --- when his daughter first brought home her future husband, he handed the prospective son-in-law a piece of wood and a knife and asked, "What do you see in the wood?" When the reply was, "A piece of wood.", he took both back rather disgustedly.
His woodcarvings were _amazing_, in particular for his ability to work with the grain and even to chase a single ring so as to make a perfectly shaped, but seemingly impossibly thin and light wing of a bird.
The ability to ban perfectly good software from being used is reducing user choice. It goes against those very ideals: possibilites and consensus. We should not adopt software paradigms that are counter to those.
TOTP is already 'good'. Passkeys are worse because of bullshit like this.
Smells like FUD. Who's providing the ability to ban software? Providers are free to implement authentication requirements like SDC vs MDC the same way they can enforce minimum password entropy or maximum password age.
In practice I'm aware of more 'lock in' behavior in the form of restricting which TOTP client is accepted than for Passkeys. There are many more bespoke 'Authenticator' apps than there are passkey implementations, many of which disallow registering codes in third party wallets.
Bitwarden also syncs TOTP. Given it's the same client, why push folks to opt for a provably weaker protocol with higher potential for user harm?
The people who wrote the spec. If the spec didn't care about what software was being used to handle passkeys, they wouldn't have written in the ability for whatever you're authenticating to to know that.
The spec is bad and the people who wrote it should feel bad.
> In practice I'm aware of more 'lock in' behavior in the form of restricting which TOTP client is accepted than for Passkeys.
I've never seen this before. This reads like FUD to me. Every single site that I use TOTP with (40~ going by the number of secrets I have) didn't give a shit, and I don't see how they could, unless they use Super™ Special™ TOTP™ just because they're so special and wish pain and suffering onto their users. It's just a QR code you scan or a secret you manually type in, which then gives you some numbers you use later, and that's all it should be.
> Bitwarden also syncs TOTP. Given it's the same client, why push folks to opt for a provably weaker protocol with higher potential for user harm?
TOTP doesn't have a higher potential for user harm. If you use it with Bitwarden, the phishing resistance passkeys tout is something you already mostly get (you can still manually copy the code, which I believe to be a good thing, believe it or not).
Given how inconsistently passkeys are implemented and how it's more difficult to get at the actual data being used (unless you export them with Keepassxc (or Bitwarden?), the potential for fuckups is much higher with passkeys.
I'm yet to see someone get phished. It must happen, given that's how passkeys got started. But the far more common ways I've seen are sessions getting snatched and data leaks, neither of which passkeys protect against. It's a marginal benefit in exchange for so many downsides.
It's not FUD. It's just my opinion and a bad spec.
Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Cisco, Steam to name a few.
>It's just my opinion
Fair enough. I find TOTP to be a PITA. I share your ire with user hostile platforms, but I see the passkey protocol as a net benefit to the status quo. It's unclear how a platform's choice to use a stricter version of the protocol is any different than their choice not to implement RFC 6238 at all.
> Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Cisco, Steam to name a few.
I use normal TOTP with Microslop. Presumably you can opt into a worse version if you use their enterprise software, if you're evil or whatever.
The rest I presume fall into the bucket of 'wants to cause their users pain and suffering'. That's the normal modus operandi for Adobe and Cicso at least. The only one of those I use is Steam, and I haven't needed to log into Steam in over 2 years, since I'm just always logged in. Fair point though.
> Fair enough. I find TOTP to be a PITA.
I do too. Yet passkeys manage to be even more of a pain in the ass with ominous potential consequences on the horizon. If it was TOTP plus some phishing resistance without any actual downside, I'd have no beef. If it was TOTP but simpler, then there's be negative beef. There are however several clear and present downsides to passkeys. That just makes for a worse tradeoff (depending on your values) rather than a genuine improvement.
As someone who's been in the home automation scene for decades, the only thing that excites me from this release is first party recipe scraping in Safari.
Processed food ingredients in the US are highly subsidized by the US government. The resulting processed foodstuffs are shelf stable, widely distributed, and trounce local options in the market place through sheer scale. More often than not, "real food" == "health food" == "luxury item". It's unfortunate and unhealthy.
I assume that shelf stable foods are easier for people who live in food deserts or have uneven incomes to maintain. If you live an hour away from a grocery store, fressh produce becomes less of a priority. Honestly having to shop less often than weekly, makes you consider shelf stable foods more. Being low income, makes you consider them just because it's cheaper and I think it's reasonable for the government to prefer to finance food that can last a long time since recipients of the food might not be able to acquire it often.
I also think people forget that there are several regions in the US where keeping a couple weeks of food on hand is not just a choice, it's a realistic smart decision because of the common occurrence of natural disasters.
The majority of people in the US live more than an hour away for a grocery store?
I think >90% of people live in an urban area where that is not the case so I don’t think it would make sense to massively shape policy for those few that live in the country.
Actually (again n=1) the people that I met that lived in the country had vastly better and cheaper access to unprocessed food than those in urban areas.
I reckon it’s more a culture thing than anything based on “cold logic”
I'm no materials scentist, is this a physically accurate description?
reply