In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these aggression tests, which involved obstacles courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes and roaring engines and terrified interns. Although impractical on the open road, part of me wishes I could have experienced that version as well.
At one point during the trip, we were attempting to make a right turn onto a busy road. Everyone’s attention was directed to the left, waiting for an opening. When the road cleared and it was safe to turn right, the car didn’t budge. I thought this was a bug at first, but when I looked to my right there was a pedestrian standing very close to the curb, giving the awkward body language that he was planning on jaywalking. This was a very human interaction: the car was waiting for a further visual cue from the pedestrian to either stop or go, and the pedestrian waiting for a cue from the car. When the pedestrian didn’t move, the self-driving car gracefully took the lead, merged, and entered the roadway.
Just cut around 200 and add a “read more” link.
Shouldn’t the logical next step be a policy overhaul?
RT @joshleejosh: A game like “Papers, Please” but where you review App Store submissions.
Tired of being angry at Apple so often. Online competency should be as important a factor in choosing a platform as the net is to our lives.
Does anyone else implement two-factor authentication this way? Because that’s unbelievably stupid. Why would you need to reset an attacked account’s password if they have two-factor auth? And how can you expect 99% of your users to keep a copy of their recovery key — especially when your own website points out that they’ll be able to create another as long as they’ve got their original password and device? This is a policy that can only, mathematically, end up locking out 100% of Apple’s users over time.
I have my recovery key in 1Password, but I’m considering turning two-factor off for my account (assuming that’s even possible), because Apple’s online services can’t be trusted with anything and I feel pretty stupid for signing up to be an early adopter of new security measures that of course they rushed to implement without understanding the consequences.
Don’t forget that, since iOS 7, your devices are locked to your iCloud account. So “just create another account” doesn’t only make you lose everything you’ve ever bought on the App Store.
It’s okay to embed a font in your app so it has a unique identity. Not okay to do all your UI in the same alternative font as everyone else.
Was wondering why all the hipster iOS developers were fetishizing the Avenir typeface. Didn’t realize it now shipped with the OS. Hate it.
If you buy Workflow for iOS, I hope you’re ready for Apple to pull the “add workflows to your home screen” functionality in two weeks.
Of all the things to complain about lately regarding iOS App Review, it’s ridiculous to even mention Papers Please having to remove nudity.
During one of my conversations with someone at App Review last month, I asked if they could tell me if some of these new apps being accepted slipped through or if their use of widgets was deemed acceptable. I heard what had come to be a popular refrain from them. They couldn’t discuss other apps with me, they would look into those apps, and if I submitted a new app with that specific functionality they would be happy to review it and let me know if it was acceptable or not by either rejecting or accepting my new app. They steadfastly refused to tell me if a certain use of a widget was acceptable or not ahead of time. […] When pressed on the issue of their policies leading to wasted developer time, I was told, “If you are afraid something you are working on will be rejected, then don’t work on it.”
I also asked specifically why Launcher was removed from the App Store after 9 days when other similar apps are still available weeks later. The answer to this question was the most interesting and informative response I had ever heard from them. They basically said that Launcher was a trailblazer in uncharted territories and that they felt that they needed to make an example of it in order to get the word out to developers that its functionality is not acceptable without them having to publish new specific guidelines. And they said that the fact that they aren’t seeing hundreds of similar apps submitted every day is proof to them that taking down Launcher was successful in this regard. […]
After Launcher was rejected and the press picked up on it and started writing articles which painted Apple in a bad light, I was afraid that Apple might be mad at me. But it turns out that was actually the outcome they were looking for all along.
What. The. Fuck.
Dear Apple: every time you pull shit like this, there are a number of iOS developers who look closer at learning Android development. At some point, it will end up costing you. (iOS has already progressively been losing the monetization advantage it had over Android, with users being more and more stingy.)
“[Transmit] cannot upload content to iCloud Drive unless the content was created in the app itself.” Remember last WWDC, when iOS 8 was announced and it felt like Christmas? Ha, how naive we were when we were younger.
RT @rustyshelf: “…Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps.” B.S. It’s almost required at this point
RT @jemmons: Apple, WWDC ‘14: “We can’t wait to see what you’ll make with it!” ⁰Apple now: “We didn’t think you’d make that. Stop!”