technology – Life on the Wicked Stage: Act 3

Observations And Questions After Apple’s Latest iPhone Duo and Apple Watch Event

Waiting to see how things unfold

I’ve got questions, some observations, and a few thoughts after Apple’s latest product announcements. In my opinion this was the best product introduction, canned or live, that Apple has done in quite some time. It makes a difference that they actually had something new to show off.

And there is newness. There’s also quite a bit of new work for developers ahead.

iPhone Pro

There’s nothing really to say about the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max models beyond steady as she goes. Apple changed some colors, added some camera updates, a few other new features internally along with the latest generation chip, and incrementally advanced the very successful iPhone 17 Pro. The 17 Pro is one of the best iPhones I’ve owned and probably Apple’s peak for that design. Nothing about the 18 Pro versions seem likely to change that. Only reinforce it.

But in all the hype about the shiny new iPhone Duo much of that will be largely ignored.

iPhone Duo

It’s both tiresome and accurate to say Apple is playing follow the leader as a late entry into the minuscule market (<2%) that is the folding smartphone game. Samsung and others have been trying to make creases disappear for some time now. Crease or no, I believe the jury is still out on whether or not folding smartphones will ever be more than a niche market. If that proves to be the case there’s nothing wrong with that, though I think Apple has more hopeful thoughts.

However this new chapter turns out, it begins with Apple replaying the same game of catchup they played after Samsung introduced large smartphones. Remember when they were called phablets? Quite frankly, I imagine Samsung and the rest are glad Apple is entering this segment because it might spark new life for the concept of folding smartphones, which hasn’t caught fire like larger smartphones did.

To lay out my bias up front, I’ve never been attracted to the folding phone concept. I’m an iPad guy and if I need a larger screen that’s my weapon of choice. And when I’m wielding an iPad I don’t want my iPhone near me, or any of the distractions like notifications I use my iPhone or Apple Watch for. Apple isn’t hyping the Duo as an iPad and that’s a good thing. That hasn’t and won’t stop the comparisons from others, although it may herald the end of the iPad mini down the road.

So, that’s my preference and my choice. And I’m both sure and glad that others have different preferences and make different choices. With that in mind, I’m glad that Apple is offering a new category of smartphone for those who do see their technology worlds unfolding differently than I do. I’m glad Apple’s competitors do as well.

I took a look at some of the earlier foldables when they started hitting the market years ago and largely wrote them off. This summer I took a look at Samsung’s most recent foldables and was actually quite surprised with the quality of the tech. I imagine once I get a chance to fondle the iPhone Duo in a store that my response will be much the same. Impressive tech, but not something I have a need for, no matter how cool it may be.

The iPhone Duo does indeed look cool. If nothing else, Apple knows how to market a product. As I’ve said many times before, the verdict on the Duo’s success or failure will be determined at a later date once we see how Apple’s claims about durability and the display hold up. Early reviews will be just that. Early. I’m also guessing there will be some attacking that screen and hinge to check out Apple’s durability claims. October is going to be an interesting month for those who follow these things.

What stood out most was Apple’s “own the whole widget” reimagining of the iPhone UX/UI to take advantage of the new device. It looks both new and familiar. Doing some reading post event I can see how much work developers have ahead of them to fully take advantage of the new device. Here’s hoping most do, because some of what I’ve seen about apps that aren’t tuned to the new device leave a lot to be desired, reminding me of how insufficient and wrong iPhone apps looked on iPads in the early days. Remember when Apple sold using iPhone apps on the iPad as a feature?

Apple’s developer website promises workshops and labs, but the Xcode 27.1 beta for developing apps for the Duo is listed as coming later this month. I’m guessing it’s going to be a challenging transition. For some, a long one.

Speaking of transitions, the fancy fading transition between the closed and open screen is not only impressively eye-catching, and speaks to the aspiration of Apple’s designers and is certainly not something we’ve seen from any competitors. Time will tell where that takes us beyond the wow factor of that first introduction.

To Crease Or Not To Crease

Apple’s engineers seem to have done a good job of hiding the crease. It’s still there, but hidden under a “perpetually flat matte surface” under a nano-texture finish. Perhaps we now know why Apple recently and surprisingly reduced by half the price of the Apple Polishing Cloth that was first introduced alongside the first nano-texture screens on the Pro Display XDR.

Left and Right Handedness

One of the questions I have that I’ve yet to see an answer for has to do with that new UI/UX. Apple claims that like the iPad, the iPhone Duo can be used in any orientation. Part of the UI/UX reimagining places the dock and controls in most images on the right of the display(s) away from the hinge. I’ve seen one image from Apple that places a menu on the left in landscape mode when two apps are in split view.

Landscape f7x2oe1oxemy large 2x.

I haven’t seen any that might do so when the device is closed and the indications from what I’ve seen is that the controls and dock mostly stay situated on the curved edge, whether the display is open or closed. This raises a question about right and left handed usage. This question came to me last night as I was using my iPhone to scroll through some reading about the Duo and realized that though I’m right-handed, I more often than not hold the iPhone in my left hand when reading or scrolling. I do the same with my iPad mini. I’m reasonably certain that if I ever purchased an iPhone Duo I would adjust. I’m not sure if the same is true for left-handers or how much it matters, even with what appears to be a very “hold it in your right hand” approach for the Duo when it is closed. I’m sure we’ll hear about it from left-handers if it does.

FaceID is one of the features iPhone and iPad users have become accustomed to. The iPhone Duo does not have FaceID, instead reverting back to TouchID for identification purposes. I’m not sure how many this might be a deal breaker for, if any. Quite a few folks are saying that if you’re wearing an Apple Watch you can use the unlock feature similarly to how you can use an Apple Watch to unlock a Mac. That might work. Although in my usage the feature worked so sporadically in unlocking my Mac that I turned it off. Maybe it’s been improved. We’ll have to wait and see.

iPhone Handoff

It’s often easy to forget that The iPhone Duo, like the iPhone Pro and other models that will be released next spring are phones. But they are. I remember when we called them cell phones rather than smartphones. Intriguing that I don’t recall seeing any imagery during the presentation of someone using the Duo to make a phone call.

Apple introduced an interesting feature that might appeal to some and might see some turbulence among carriers.

In these days of eSIMs, iPhone Handoff allows the use of one phone number between two devices so a user can switch back and forth whenever they want. I’m not sure what the demand for this will be, but some will certainly enjoy the feature. Depending on if the carriers can get their acts together.

At launch only T-Mobile and Germany’s Telekom support the feature, with Verizon saying they will later this year. AT&T apparently has some work to do on its infrastructure to make the feature possible.

Given how carriers love their ridiculous fees when you activate a new phone I wonder how this will get priced out. As I got ready to publish this, I noticed T-Mobile has announced that it will charge $5 a month for the feature.

Apple Watch Health and Privacy

Both the Apple Watch and the Apple Watch Ultra got updates to Series 12 and Ultra 4 respectively. Both also increased RAM from 4GB to 2GB. Apple continues its push into Health and Fitness in these next editions. Both got improved, but not new, health sensors to go along with a slew of new health features in the Health app, including something Apple calls Readiness that will let you know if you’re ready to take on whatever task or adventure awaits you or take it easy for the day.

There’s also a new Longevity tab that includes a feature called Health Age that lets you compare your statistics relative to others. Apple has entered into a partnership with Quest Diagnostics so that you can order a comprehensive lab test for $119 directly through the app to use as a baseline. This is sure to trigger a raft of social media posts bragging or complaining about how people’s Health Age scores compare in the way we have with sleep scores since that feature was introduced.

All of these features continue Apple’s forays into health guidance with wearables and are now promoted as being made possible by Apple Intelligence.

Speaking of Apple Intelligence, there’s also a controversial couple of new audio features for the Apple Watch that can record conversations. The privacy conscious, legal beagles, and pervert glasses foes have already begun stirring the pot and sounding alarms in this age when any kind of always on surveillance draws increasingly extreme negative pushback. Throw AI in the mix and the brew boils a lot faster.

Live Rewind lets you transcribe the last 15 seconds of a conversation you might have missed. The transcription can be saved to the new Siri app for viewing later. Siri Recap is an always listening feature that that uses ambient listening to take notes of conversations, summaries of which again can also be reviewed in the Siri App.

With Apple’s traditional bent towards privacy protection, they swear up and down that users are in control and that any of the summaries can only be viewed by you, are not accessible by Apple, and that audio is not recorded or stored. All of these features are opt-in and can be turned off. Apple also suggests “Be mindful of those around you. While audio is not recorded and stored, and no speakers are attributed, consider those around you where conversations might be private or sensitive.”

Seriously.

Siri recap with iphone.

My bottom line observation here is that this move into wearable AI by Apple is seeding the ground before Apple does or does not roll out any of the products we’ve heard rumored such as AirPods with cameras and its own smart glasses. Apple’s moves here, while cloaked in its usual privacy protection mantra comes at a time when there’s a growing distaste for anything AI related, a real backlash against smart glasses and any other surveillance tech no matter how cool or how beneficial it may be to those with accessibility challenges, and a blatant lack of trust for anyone on any level these days, especially big tech. That’s a broad brush to tar with, but it’s one that’s fully loaded and dripping these days.

It’s an old story now that Apple is behind when it comes to Artificial Intelligence. It’s not just the technology that’s lagging. It’s also that Apple has let others with much less social awareness define use cases in ways that turn off potential customers.

Even if this tech is only audio related, and all of Apple’s privacy claims prove out, I certainly don’t think Apple wants people to associate its popular Apple Watch brand with the toxicity of pervert glasses. And that’s before we get to the legal issues given how different states have different laws about the recording of conversations. Glenn Fleishman has an excellent article about this that you should read.

Timing is everything and I just don’t think this is the time, nor will there ever be a time when this kind of thing is accepted by a majority of users. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

A few other topics that caught my eye were announced during the day.

AppleCare One Family Plan

Apple has been offering AppleCare One allowing users to insure and get support for up to three devices for $19.99 and add other eligible devices for a cost. Apple’s new family plan will allow users who are or start a shared family group to ensure all eligible devices for each family member for $50 a month. This is a potential for real savings for some.

Apple Reference Image

This is a good thing that I wish wasn’t necessary. But these are the times we live in. Apple Reference Image is a way of providing proof that a photo was captured on an iPhone, and not an AI generated image. From Apple’s website:

Users can now prove the authenticity of a photo taken on iPhone 18 Pro models with Apple Reference Image, powered by the new sensor in the Main camera that can sign every pixel it sees. When a photo is taken in the new Reference mode, the camera captures signed sensor data that Private Cloud Compute develops into an unalterable reference image. Reference images can be viewed in the Photos app alongside the main image, like a digital negative, to visually compare the two assets and determine if any edits were made. APIs are available in iOS, iPadOS, and macOS 27 for third-party apps to enable viewing of these reference images.

Image metadata and upcoming support for the SynthID standard can also help users identify images generated or edited with AI. Together with Apple Reference Image, this set of features represents a multifaceted approach to image authenticity — vital for photojournalists, photographers, and everyday viewers.

The Debut of John Ternus as CEO

Ternus did an admirable job in the canned presentation, though at times he looked a little gun shy. The opening film featuring a clever hand off from Tim Cook to Ternus was well done. Although it felt like it was two beats too long and would have been better served by getting to the punch line sooner. What’s apparent from how the event was structured is that Apple is loudly saying that they have a product guy at the top again. Ternus is “the guy” and there’s no doubt the pressure is now on for him to deliver.

As I said earlier. I felt Apple’s event was well done and the best it has done in some time. Picking a nit though, I was not a fan of all of the extras walking through the various locations while information was being presented. Each time someone walked through in the background it pulled my focus. The idea certainly established a nice mise-en-scène, but I largely found the extraneous traffic distracting.

It’s going to be interesting to follow how all of this continues to roll out. We won’t begin to hear real substance about the Duo from reviewers and users until October. That gives developers time to try and catch up, and it also will put the focus on Apple Intelligence and Siri AI as the operating systems that end in OS27 roll out next week for those with devices that support it. Note that most older Apple Watches do not support a lot of the new features. New Apple Watches and iPhone Pros will be getting in users’ hands late next week as well.

My hunch is there will be a lot of news unfolding this fall.

Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.

The Debate Over This Writing Thing

Words, words, words. Bits, bits, bits.

Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.

Shutterstock 2525907005. A hand writing with a quill an ink.

I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:

That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.

In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.

Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?

It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.

In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.

I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.

In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:

I also looked up the word “write.”

And the word “writer.”

Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:

The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.

Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.

Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.

There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?

If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?

That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:

We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.

We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.

Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)

The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.

But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?

I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:

Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.

Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2

A 1000 monkeys indeed.

(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)

Leopards Don’t Change Their Spots

Neither will Meta and Zuckerberg

Maybe I’m just too old. Maybe I’m just too cynical. Maybe it’s a combination of both. After yesterday’s news that Meta settled its lawsuit with a bevy of state attorneys general, I find my eyebrow still raised in skepticism.

The bottom line of the settlement is Meta has to pay $18 billion (a pittance for Meta) over the course of 10 years and make some changes to its structure in an effort to better protect kids. On the surface that sounds like a good move to me. But there are some catches.

First, that payout is only if other companies like YouTube, TikTok and Snap do the same. Apparently Snap has said it will follow along. The others remain silent as of this writing.

Second, if the others follow along Meta has put itself in a position to write safety rules for everybody else. Can’t imagine that will go over well.

Third, I don’t trust anything coming from Meta. This seems like a shrewd PR move to take the heat off and set Meta apart. So far the media seems to be buying it.

Some of the feature changes might actually do some good. There’s no telling how that plays out. But again, I don’t trust Meta (or the others) when revenue and market share is the line. TechDirt has a good rundown of the feature changes.

Remember how Meta was born back in the day, initially called Facemash, to essentially evaluate the attractiveness of Harvard students. The company has gone on to fame and riches and is now giving the term “pervert” new life with the reaction to its Ray-Ban smart glasses, now derisively called “pervert glasses.”

Leopards don’t change their spots. Zuckerberg won’t either.

(Image from Bibake Uppal on Unsplash)

Getting Used To The Phrase: “Without Human Involvement”

Like shouting at the wind

John Gruber links to an interesting story about Dutch regulators fining Uber almost $1 billion for suspending dishonest drivers “without warning or human involvement.”

Jon tyson tEVKC91Qm6c unsplash. A neon sign saying For Humans By Humans

Say what you want about Uber’s practices, dishonest drivers, scams, and what have you. That’s not my interest in linking to the story. What struck me this morning was that phrase “without warning or human involvement.

It struck me because I’ve been dealing with a similar issue with one of my prescriptions that keeps getting changed. According to my pharmacy and my doctor, it appears that the change keeps happening without “any human involvement” because they are seeing this happen with other patients and customers on the same medication.

A few thoughts.

1. There is always “human involvement.” Someone made a decision at some point in the process. Otherwise it wouldn’t be happening. If the robots are capable of making these decisions on their own, I guess we’re headed to a world where the only legal remedy is to pull the plug. And we all know that ain’t happening.

2. We’ll never be able to track these decisions back to whomever is culpable. Although maybe we will if the AI responsible for note taking and code changes can actually do that job and maintain the logs responsibly, “without any human involvement.”

3. This kind of thing is going to replace the usual bullshit excuses we used to get when various customer service operations actually had humans you could talk to. Computers hang up more easily on customers than humans do, so the day-to-day customer service battles are going to become more frustrating than they are already. Who knew that AI was an acronym for avoiding interaction?

Looks like we’ll all be blaming the AI robots more and more in the future. For the record, I’m not a fan of shouting at the wind.

(Image from Jon Tyson on Unsplash

MacStories: Trouble In Apple Pundit Land

Changing, challenging, and sad times.

There’s no question that many of us are facing challenging times these days. On so many fronts. Given how nothing that once seemed remotely stable feels anywhere close to that anymore, I find myself alternating between being angry, sad, and numb with an increasing frequency that tends toward the numb end of the scale.

However, there’s disconcerting news in Apple pundit land that leaves me more sad than numb or angry. MacStories, an Apple-centric blog I’ve followed and subscribed to for a long time is undergoing some changes that rub me the wrong way.

From what I’ve been able to gather from social media, and in a belated explanation post from the blog’s founder, Federico Viticci, several of the team’s members have quit over a recent decision by the organization to resurface the MacStories presence on Elon Musk’s X, which used to be Twitter, and remains nothing short of cesspool of depravity.

To give you an idea of the turmoil this is causing internally for the site that belated explanation post doesn’t appear on MacStories as of this writing, but on Viticci’s own blog. MacStories also didn’t put out its regular end of the week newsletter and several of its podcasts are on hiatus.

I’ll share some links from some of the employees leaving MacStories.

A blog post from Devon Dundee.

A Mastodon post from Jonathan Reed.

A Mastodon post from Niléane.

From the sound of things it sounds like the MacStories decision was made without consulting other team members. That’s never a fun time. I know. I’ve experienced it myself. From both sides of the table.

I can’t and don’t pretend to speak to any more than what I’ve shared above regarding the decision making and the internal machinations. I can say that one of the reasons I’m saddened is that it points to puzzling moment for website that also hosts and generates several podcasts in which its talent feels free to judge and criticize corporate and tech screwups, with at times gleeful abandon. To my mind, this feels like one of those screwups, but who knows?

If I wanted to I guess I could gather some AI generated transcripts from past podcasts and offer some pretty damning quotes about Elon Musk and other tech titans as examples, but I won’t.

I guess this decision proves just how difficult it is to learn from the oft-repeated mistakes of others. At least I hope that’s what it means. Otherwise it borders on hypocrisy.

Perhaps this turnabout shouldn’t come as that much of a surprise. In the early days of this AI boom, MacStories was at the forefront of calling out how the industry was built on the outright theft of intellectual property. Going so far as to writing a letter to U.S. Senators saying that AI needed to be regulated.

MacStories was also quite vocal when it chose to leave Twitter and later Meta. Those choices fit well with the ethos Viticci and his co-editor John Voorhees had established in their writings and podcasts on their way to becoming legitimate superstars in the Apple pundit community. I eagerly anticipated their annual reviews of Apple operating systems, adventures with Shortcuts, coverage of apps that I might find of interest, and their news coverage.

But since those early days of AI skepticism, MacStories has become increasingly known for a site where Viticci and Voorhees have immersed themselves deeply in AI. To say they’re pushing the cutting edge would be accurate, and the website, and some of their other content has increasingly become more about those adventures.

More power to them if that’s where they want to take their endeavors. It’s their website and business. I will say though that this shift for MacStories feels as abrupt and expedient as how the tech bro community switched horses from essentially supporting the Democrats in the U.S to kneeling to Trump before and after his second election.

That said, I’ll admit I do enjoy reading about and listening to their recent AI exploits, even though I’m not directly interested in participating in the way I did with some of their pre-AI days.

I mean, I hate to say it, but this AI-shit on is on us, whether we like it or not, and my interest in listening is that I’d rather understand what it is I don’t like about it than not.

But the sadness I feel about this moment (and I think it will come to be seen as a defining moment in Apple punditry), has to do more with a bigger picture than just a potential shift in Apple tech coverage.

These mid-2020’s going into the 2030’s are going to be defined by and large by the tech oligarch takeover. We can yell all we want to about how corrupt, evil, and incompetent our politicians are, but what I think we’re just coming to realize is that in the end the politicians don’t matter. These new age robber barons have bought all the government(s) they need to essentially do whatever they want. Elon Musk in my view is the worst of the worst. I don’t support anything that supports anything he touches.

I’ve been saddened by watching more than I thought possible migrate back to X-Twitter after the great migration away from it. I think I’ve been successful in unsubscribing from most publications that still use that platform to promote their material. I’m not going to spend my money for a subscription that will put more pennies into the pocket of a man who thinks allowing the creation of nonconsensual child and other pornography on his website is free speech and not a crime, much less one who revels in the power to destroy anything and everything his drug addled brain takes a fancy to.

I’ve made business decisions in my life I’m not proud of and lived to regret them. We all have choices to make and we’re defined by them. I’d like to say that I try not to judge a person or a business for making one they feel they need to even when those decisions disappoint me. That’s not always true. When a decision is made or being planned under what feels like the cover of darkness, it feels like all that’s being hidden might be their own sadness and guilt. At least I hope so.

So, I’m sad to dissociate myself with MacStories. I wish them well. I also wish good things in the future for those who obviously made the tough decisions to leave the publication in the midst of all of this. I wish more of us had that kind of courage.

All things must pass.

Throwing Rocks At The Internet

Eventually, someone breaks a window.

The Internet was never perfect. It was always a work in progress. That’s usually considered a phrase with a good connotation. But that depends on the side of the coin you’re looking at. It always begs the question, progress for whom?

A young boy getting ready to toss a rock

Calling it enhshittification is apt, but it’s also an insufficient description. It implies that the mess can be cleaned up. I don’t think that’s the case. We’re too deep in the shit.

Implementing Artificial Intelligence into everything has mucked up most things the same way that inserting ad-tech into everything did back in the early days of that craze. I’d wager that in the days of the ad-tech explosion 8 times out of 10 most of the updates we downloaded or were subjected to dealt more with ad-tech than “bug fixes and improving reliability.”

It reminds me of the early days of DRM when there was a constant wack-a-mole game, trying to maintain and protect media copy protection schemes. I want to think that it cost more to keep fixing things than it ever yielded in profits, but that’s obviously naive on my part.

We’re currently seeing the same with AI. The models are changing so rapidly that today’s new release or bug fix is probably outdated by the time it reaches most computers or smartphones. The pace is maddening and the disruptions for every day users even more so, including those who don’t even use the stuff.

Given how things are going I don’t think even the purveyors of AI know what they are actually releasing. They feel like little kids trying to see who can throw a rock the farthest. Eventually, someone breaks a window.

We really never know when a web service chooses to update, things just break. (Looking at you WordPress.) We rarely know what most updates to apps really mean. It’s becoming a rare thing to see a real list of bug fixes published alongside a release. The developers who do so deserve your business.

The difference in this rock throwing frenzy is that many of the geeks who in the past worked hard to defeat copy protection and ad-tech are only too eager to help the AI purveyors throw their rocks further. There’s a lot of would be Oppenheimers out there.

Set aside the potential dangers of using this tech for military use and malicious attacks. For everyday users of the Internet, the bitch of it is many of the AI changes we’re starting to see and those we will certainly see more of the in the future will be to further serve ad-tech as the AI industry inevitably pours that on to try and recoup some of its out of control costs.

That’s an incestuous marriage that I’m not looking forward to seeing the rock throwing delinquents it spawns.

(Image from on Kristine Jones on Shutterstock)

Rough Perpetual Beta Season

Nothing is just local anymore.

The way tech happens these days it seems like things are always in beta. Even if you’re not running beta software.

I haven’t run betas the last few years, and so far this year I haven’t either. I did pick up a MacBook Neo to perhaps give macOS Golden Gate a try. Following my own advice to never install new software, especially betas, if you’re traveling (and I’ve been traveling a lot) so far I’m still beta free, though I have been touched by some issues relating to the betas.

These days, not running the betas doesn’t keep Apple users from suffering some of the headaches that can come during beta season for those who do. Several things are at play.

First, as Apple is rolling out betas for testing on devices, it’s also making changes behind the scenes with iCloud. Since just about everything touches iCloud in one way or the other, strange things can happen.

Second, developers are busy trying to further their apps along to be ready for the fall release. At times that leads to time and resource conflicts when it comes to maintaining existing software for prior releases.

Third, Apple might make a major change that affects an entire class of software. Menu Bar managers, the software some use to keep track of apps that offer functionality from clicking on an icon in the Menu Bar, took a big hit last year with Tahoe that never really got solved. From what I hear that continues with the Golden Gate betas as well.

It’s one thing to chalk things up to it being beta season. It’s another for those who aren’t really technically inclined to find software they are comfortable with not working, seemingly out of the blue.

I’ve been saying that we’re living in the land of perpetual beta software for some time now. Beta season used to be a window of time during the summer months and through the first point release of Apple’s new operating systems in the fall. I could usually count on things being relatively solid from about December through May each year. But that window is opening wider given the pace of things and that wider window continues to let in a lot of bugs that can’t seem to be swatted away.

At this point, we’re close enough to the official release of Apple’s new operating systems that I’ll most likely remain beta free. I doubt the Menu Bar issue will get resolved before the official release happens, so I imagine Menu Bar users will be dealing with those issues throughout the fall and into next summer, if not longer. I’ve also experienced issues with some Shortcuts that I rely on and that continues to be the case.

One other interesting note on this year’s beta season. Apple’s operating systems ending in OS 26.6 apparently included a head start on indexing users’ devices to prepare for Apple Intelligence and Siri AI in the fall. I, and several of the users I support, saw some weirdness during that indexing period following those 26.6 updates in Mail, Photos, and Messages. Mail, messages, and photos seemed to disappear or not load. That weirdness seemed to have worked out after the indexing concluded, but it did cause some consternation among several of the users I support.

That’s the thing in our always tethered to the cloud tech lifestyles. You never know what might happen on your local device when someone flips a switch to “fix bugs and improve reliability” on the backend.

Too Many Frankensteins

There’s a reason they call it science FICTION.

Why does no one ever read the end of the story? Or if they do, why don’t they pay attention?

Ever since Mary Shelley gave us Frankenstein, laying out a moral of a story proving that just because you can, doesn’t mean you should, there seems to be a preponderance of ignorance running alongside the obvious capabilities our current day Dr. Frankensteins possess. It feels like the story is playing on an endless Youtube Short or TikTok or Reel without ever reaching the end and the story’s point. The only thing coming close to the volume of ignorance is the overdose of hubris that someone must be selling somewhere on some street corner. Or maybe it’s testosterone injections.

Whatever it is, whether in tech and AI, politics, sports, media, or fill in the blank for any field that can issue a press release and attract attention like flies to rotting flesh, it’s past the epidemic stage and has spread like a plague.

The fever stokes flames on Wall Street, which seems content to fuel them further until it all melts down. As long as they make their fees. Makes one wonder how the prediction markets on any number of popping bubbles are doing?

Between AI companies climbing over each other to fight over which model can cause more damage when they break free, companies creating horror movie-like robots to do damage control in dangerous circumstances, companies working to create AI powered glasses that will be used for mass surveillance — much less trouble making privacy violations, the tech sector seems to be outrunning the rest when it comes to the mad scientist wannabe game.

Politicians aren’t far behind, lagging only by their inability to keep up with and understand the changes happening around them as they count the cash being stuffed in their pockets. Sports teams intent on winning today don’t seem to care that they may be permanently damaging their game.

And there’s a media that doesn’t actually care who wins and who loses as long as they have access to the story of the rise and the story of the fall. Imagine if today’s media had covered Dr. Frankenstein’s efforts the way they cover Musk, Altman, Zuckerberg, or any of the others.

It’s too broad a generalization to say these stories never end well, even though many fail whether the consequences are intended or not. But in a world seemingly being driven by a bunch of geeks who profess a love for science fiction, and those who can’t help but take their money to drive their own ambitions, you’d think someone along the way would understand that they don’t get to write the end.

But that would require more than reading a summary.

Sunday Morning Reading

Revelate

Still on the road for summer travels, but this week offered a few moments to do some reading when not toodling along listening to the music of Glen Hansard. So time to share a few good pieces of writing and good reads in this week’s Sunday Morning Reading.

Kick things off with a piece by Robert P. George called The Two Great Threats To Truth. He questions whether there really is a difference between moral relativism and fantacism, if in the end they yield the same result. The piece will make you think. If thinking is your thing.

Claire Stapelton rose through the ranks at Google. From reading The Voice Of Google, it sounds like she saw it all, and she’s telling quite a bit of it.

“Government Efficiency and Death by Indifference” is the subhead to Anton Shekhovtsov’s The Techno-Oligarchy’s First “Holocaust.” It’s quite a dire piece, but certainly worth your time.

Speaking of oligarchs, a trio of NY Times writers take a look at Larry Ellison and his bet on AI. Check out Jonathan Mahler, Jim Rutenberg and Kirsten Grind’s story, Larry Ellision Bet It All on the A.I. Boom. Will He Be The Face of the A.I. Bubble? At some point this bubble has to pop, right?

David Todd McCarthy says There Is A Crack In Everything. Truth and beauty lie in the imperfections, not in the perfect.

The world is certainly an imperfect place. Rachel Yoder’s short story, The Promise perfectly reveals that.

Alex Skopic flushes out some thoughts on the failed state in Diarrhea In Every Pot and A Gun In Every Mailbox. When you break things down to “shooting and shitting” you might be on to something.

There’s nothing obligatory about Jeff Johnson’s piece The Obligatory AI Post. Make it obligatory reading.

To close out this week, a sad one when we lost one of the good ones in Glen Hansard, give a read to Sophia Stewart’s tribute, The People’s Troubador. If you don’t know the music, you should.

Revelate.

(Image from Samuel Couto on Unsplash)

Thanks for reading. Feel free to subscribe if you want. It’s free. If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here. If you’d like more click on the Sunday Morning Reading link in the category column to check out what’s been shared on Sunday’s past. You can also find more of my writings on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. This site does not use affilate links.

Fondling The Folds Of Samsung

Nice tech to touch, pricey to own (or lease)

So yesterday started out ok but then the day took a turn and folded in on itself. In the neighborhood of the Airbnb we’re staying in on this trip, the city is replacing the sidewalks. Inconvenient, but hey, infrastructure. That party started two days ago and ended just short of our digs and kicked off again yesterday morning.

A hand holding an unfolded black Samsung Galaxy Z Fold8 display phone, showing the home screen with various app icons, promotional widgets like "Explore What's new" and "Switch from iPhone", and a product sign beneath it.

I stepped outside to take a picture and noticed workers all running away from the torn up hunks of sidewalk and then one frantically waving me back inside screaming “Gas! Gas!”

I jumped back in the house thinking this was bad. And that it could get worse. I assumed I would need to evacuate, so I began frantically packing a few things in a backpack when there was a knock on the door. It was a firefighter instructing me to shelter in place. That surprised me. Two minutes later he knocked again and said to evacuate.

Construction equipment working on a residential street during the day. On the right, a yellow John Deere excavator uses its backhoe to break up asphalt along the edge of a lawn and concrete sidewalk. On the left, a large red and white dump truck sits nearby, parked along the torn-up road where chunks of concrete and pavement are piled.

I grabbed my backpack and headed out for the day, calling the owners of the Airbnb on the way out the door. The good news on that part of the day’s unfolding events is that all turned out well, the gas company fixed the line, the sidewalk crew will have to wait until Monday to move on with their job. And in the end I met quite a few of the neighbors as we watched the gas company wrap up their piece of the action.

After evacuating, I had no idea how long I’d be out. I figured I’d run some errands then park myself at a Starbucks until I got the all clear. There’s a Best Buy across the street so I wandered over to see if they had any of the new folding phones from Samsung on display. They did.

I picked them up, folded and unfolded them, checked out a few things, and took the photos in the galleries below.

To be honest, I’m not that interested in a foldable smartphone from Samsung, Apple, or anyone. I’m certainly not that interested in one that costs close to $2000 or more. But given that the smart folks who make smartphones think this is worth spending tons of money on, I thought I’d check them out.

My limited impressions are pretty straightforward. The foldables from Samsung open and close. The action to do either required more oomph than I was prepared for. The store manager tells me that will change with ongoing usage. Somehow that doesn’t seem like an encouraging selling point. They are pretty devices to look at and all three feel surprisingly nicer in the hand than I thought they would. The construction feels solid and I dare say, premium.

There is a sort of Goldilocks and The Three Bears thing going on with the different sizes.

The larger Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra is too tall in much the same way its name is too long. There’s no way it’s a one-handed device when closed.

A hand holding the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra in closed position

A hand holding the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra in partially open position

The mid-sized squat rectangular Galaxy Z Fold 8 felt the nicest in my hand, surprisingly so. When opened it felt the most inviting. Given that what’s rumored to death about Apple’s upcoming foldable appears very similar, it will be interesting to see how this mid-size plays out in the marketplace.

A hand holding the Galaxy Z Fold 8 with the screen dark and a store display sign showing a price of $1899.

A hand holding the Galaxy Z Fold 8 with the screen showing the time and a store display sign showing a price of $1899.

The smallest of the bunch, the Galaxy Z Flip 8 feels like it could work if you’re looking for a flip phone, or the smallest smartphone of the bunch, but it’s not something that interests me.

A hand holding the Galaxy Flip8 in closed position.

A hand holding the Galaxy Fold8 in open position with a store display sign showing a price of $1199. The home screen is pink in color.

Much has been made about Samsung’s process to flatten out the crease. In both Fold models it certainly looks and feels less obtrusive than it has on earlier models I’ve taken similar cursory looks at. Time will tell how that works out in the real world of opening and closing.

That said, storeroom lighting isn’t going to help Samsung because the crease picks up light from most angles as you can see from the photos. Given that Apple is supposedly using Samsung’s foldable screen technology for its foldable I’m sure Apple will have the same store display lighting issues as well.

Of course software will also tell the tale. I didn’t really have the time to check out much in the way of software on the device and contrary to the WiFi symbol saying they were connected I wasn’t able to get on the Internet to check things out.

We’re heading into an interesting era with smartphones. As I said, I’m not that interested in a folding phone of any make, but it’s nice to have different size and shape options available. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

That said, with prices rising across the entire tech landscape, introducing or continuing to iterate on previous versions featuring expensive price points seems like a risky bet to me, even if the devices have a premium feel to them.