Here's a Ken Livingstone quote from the foreword of "Drama Games: For Those Who Like To Say No":
> In the early 1980s, when the GLC (Greater London Council) was trying to save and create jobs to mitigate the impact of Thatcher's recession, we discovered that the most labour-intensive form of public spending was the arts, and so during the five years from 1981 to 1986 we increased spending on arts and recreation from £l6 million to £160 million. Virtually every actor, painter, poet, sculptor and, in particular, community artist was in work, and it made London a much more exciting city to live in. As well as taking orchestras from the Royal Festival Hall to play in the canteen at Ford's Assembly Plant in Dagenham, we particularly tried to reach disaffected youth. It's against that background that I was able to understand Chris Johnston's book. (Oh, and by the way, if you want to know which is the least labour-intensive form of public spending, it is the military.)
Maybe if we stopped pushing insane amounts of money into fossil fuels and the military industrial complex, and instead redirected it into the arts and sciences then, just maybe, we might actually end up with a happier, more employed, more fulfilled, and more equal planet.
The thing is what is the alternative option? If you don't build it, then your rivals do. All of your electronic and military systems then become compromised because your rivals can exploit or negate them one way or another via AI. So you have to build it regardless. It's a suicide pact the same way nuclear weapons are a suicide pact but if you don't have them then you're at the mercy of anyone else who does.
Sometimes I wonder if what will actually happen, is that we will have very small startups, essentially a C-Suite but with actual coding skills and domain knowledge, who build new companies using AI that end up gaining an advantage over the incumbents and force them out of business. Indirectly you're replaced by AI. I could see the drasticity of the changes to culture and workflow that AI demands being too much for most legacy companies to handle. For instance, there are still a shockingly large number of companies relying on seriously dated software and paper based systems.
In my opinion, Cloudflare are coming at this from the wrong angle. WordPress is so popular because back in the day it was the easiest way to get a website built. So it got a network effect of engineers behind it which is why it persists at 40% of websites today. Same thing happened with React - majority of Typescript sites are written in React and NextJS because of the network effect around it.
Yeah the security aspect is important, but how many of those Wordpress engineers are going to jump ship to this because of security when they've been fine with the risk so far? My money is not a lot. If someone is a WordPress dev in 2026, they're probably not the type of dev that likes to upskill and learn new tech. Similarly, if you're looking to target the average joe looking to build a fresh website, would that consumer really choose this over Wix or Squarespace? It doesn't look easier to use so I wouldn't count on it. So where is the network effect going to come from to make this the new WordPress?
I could see Vinext being successful if they keep at it— I think there are a sizeable amount of people who would like to move away from Vercel (and who will probably migrate to Tanstack when the ecosystem is more stable). But I'm not sure people on WordPress really want to leave. If they really want to make this successful I think they need a better angle which in my opinion would be making it easier, quicker, cheaper and more flexible than Squarespace/Wix/Shopify etc
The author's conclusion is fucking astonishing. Don't respond with bitterness - focus on your hobbies, friendships and love. Exactly how are people meant to do any of that exactly when, as you've just laid out, they are not going to have any ability to keep a roof over their head?
> And critically: part of what made the present possible was that some of those hundred billion people pushed, slowly and painfully and often without reward, against the legal structures that governed their time.
Rather than mincing words how about we state plainly how most of those pushes were made: through violence, death, and war.
I agree that AI today over-engineers. However with the rate that everything is improving, do people really think that it's also not going to be able to refactor and optimise the code in a year or two from now? It can already do a decent job at it today if you prompt it to.
> The reader is not respected enough by the software.
The reader is not respected by the software because the reader themselves does not respect the software or the article. If the reader paid for a subscription to the website they would get an ad-free version. Don't pay and then this is what you get. The money has to come from somewhere. The issue is that a large portion of the population seems to think that if a product is digital then it should be free which is maybe fine if we are going to live in a world with Universal Basic Income but in our existing system is absolutely ludicrous.
We used to pay for things - including the news. The clear issue is that the working class have (since 1970s but especially since the financial crisis) tolerated having their inflation adjusted incomes degraded so there is no longer the money to pay. Outside of governments who have failed to take the necessary action against corporations and promote a power balance between investors, business and workers, the main cause of this is the lack of courage in middle management.
The executive suite have not tolerated this degradation and their salaries have risen accordingly. In contrast, middle management attain a level of safety/comfort and then coast - they don't want the hassle of looking for another job so they don't risk pushing for a pay rise. They just accept whatever meagre rise is offered because they think "well at least I'm still better off than the guys lower down the chain". This then filters down as the ceiling for the lower ranks can never be higher than the management. Over time this becomes a gigantic issue, particularly in countries with a strong minimum wage that rises every year as the gap between the worker and management closes every year. Management then start blaming the government rather than actually looking at themselves and the fact that they are not pushing for bigger wages out of fear of rocking the boat.
I literally saw this play out at a billion dollar revenue international non-tech company where I used to work a few years back. Directors were on £125k. Department heads on £75k. Tech leads on £55-65k. Seniors on £40-50k. Intermediates £27-35k. Juniors £25k. Devs who had developed features worth millions to the company would get offered pathetic pay rises of £2-5k because offering any more would then mean they'd be treading on the next rung.
There is a case to be made that teaching improves the understanding and insight of the teacher which in turn can increase their research ability. For starters, it provides a less boring way of drilling fundamentals. But more importantly, having to answer questions from students which very likely will be coming from odd and unexpected directions, helps the teacher clarify their thinking. It could well be that one of these odd questions, the answer for which the teacher takes for granted, may actually hold some insight or raise questions into what they are working on outside of class.
In a similar vein, it is recommended that if you are in a business meeting you hear what the junior positions have to say about something first and work your way up the chain of command rather than the other way around due to the junior positions being less familiar with internal processes and thus more likely to flag or suggest something completely out of left field that the higher ups might miss.
Everyone seems so focussed on the price and the RAM that noone is talking about the fact that macOS is now running on the A system chips which makes me wonder how far away from an iPad that can swap between iOS and macOS when you dock it in the keyboard are we...
This does remind me somewhat of military command structures with L1-L5 being enlisted ranks and L6-L10 either being NCO or Commissioned depending on your view of how much gatekeeping is involved.
Not an expert but surely it's only a matter of time until there's a way to update with the latest information without having to retrain on the entire corpus?
Something I noticed recently is that Claude Code interprets "or" as inclusive or (or at least it does when writing function names). I suspect that this must be due to it's code specific nature considering I would expect the majority of or use in written language to be exclusive or.
In my opinion, governments are going to have to tax the big tech companies hard and distribute the money to funding bodies like Arts Council. I can see a future "Tech Council" for open source software organisations to apply for funding. It'll get to the point where every OSS developer has their own Community Interest Company or join with a few other devs to create a CIO in order to acquire funding.
Of course, now you're opening a whole other can of worms. In the UK, only 1 in 9 Arts Council funding applications is successful.
> In the early 1980s, when the GLC (Greater London Council) was trying to save and create jobs to mitigate the impact of Thatcher's recession, we discovered that the most labour-intensive form of public spending was the arts, and so during the five years from 1981 to 1986 we increased spending on arts and recreation from £l6 million to £160 million. Virtually every actor, painter, poet, sculptor and, in particular, community artist was in work, and it made London a much more exciting city to live in. As well as taking orchestras from the Royal Festival Hall to play in the canteen at Ford's Assembly Plant in Dagenham, we particularly tried to reach disaffected youth. It's against that background that I was able to understand Chris Johnston's book. (Oh, and by the way, if you want to know which is the least labour-intensive form of public spending, it is the military.)
Maybe if we stopped pushing insane amounts of money into fossil fuels and the military industrial complex, and instead redirected it into the arts and sciences then, just maybe, we might actually end up with a happier, more employed, more fulfilled, and more equal planet.