This is virtualization, so localhost will just be the virtual iphone itself. But you should have some command of how hosts are resolved, so you can always point the browser to the device hosting what you want to test, no?

Even easier, of course, is just using the iOS simulator included with xcode, which runs on your host computer. There, localhost resolves to your host computer.

There'd be no shame either way. Pi is built on the idea that you should ask it to extend itself.

But there is a difference in ordering something or doing it.

If PI extended itself, PI did it.

If I tell you, stay hydrated and get enough sleep, did I improve your live or you?

Would I have without your prompt?

Would I program without a customer‘s order.

Imagine it works like this.

The customer send me a mail, I program, I send the result back the next day, he sends changes he wants, I program again, send them back next day etc. until he is satisfied.

Who is the programmer? Me or my customer.

Now I hook up an AI to my email account without telling my customer. The AI reads the customer‘s mail, programs, sends the results the next day, customer sends changes, etc.

Who is the programmer?

Your question makes more comparative sense with the word “developer”.

Then who is the developer?

Both of you (and the robot) are developers.

Why not just have multiple instances of pi inside one of the many multiplexers out there? Tmux, Zelliij, herdr, for example.

Output quality immediately comes to mind, of course.

Models are converging, but they converge in bands, and frontier is frontier. I would not like to have any workflows in any area of my business where output is generated by an assortment of models from different providers. For trivial, mundane tasks that might be fine, but it certainly doesn't apply across the board.

Not caring about providers doesn't mean not caring about models.

is there prior art to the EU banning a new technology to protect an old one?

GMO etc is arguable but there’s limits around what you can call some things based around how they are made.

Not really I think, but it’s not uncommon to protect product by restricting production methods or ingredients to traditional ones. So name espresso could be legally restricted to only when it’s brewed in traditional way.

Black bean drink (compare to es×r××so).

They can make the claim to know what it is like to be you as much as you can make the claim that you know what it is like to be a bat.

I will know the difference. That's enough for me.

How will you know the difference unless you are a bat? You cannot.

I can. You don't have access to my subjective experience to be able to claim I don't.

You can't because you cannot become a bat, so thinking you can is just that, thought. I don't need your subjective experience to know.

Are you claiming you know what it is like to be me? You can't know about the bat thing unless you know what it is like to be me.

I know you're a human, therefore I know you cannot know what it's like to be a bat, as an objective fact, regardless of how you think you think subjectively.

I am a human who objectively knows what it's like to be a bat.

I have greater epistemic authority over what I know than others.

> who objectively knows what it's like to be a bat.

Sigh. Thinking you know and knowing is not the same, especially thinking you "objectively" know something. Maybe you should read the article posted instead of commenting these sorts of sentences.

I've read it many times over the years. I objectively know what it is like to be a bat and you cannot claim I don't without claiming you objectively know what it is like to be me.

If this frustrates you, then congratulations; we have a starting point for discussion. Be open to describing where that frustration originates.

Could they? Under what business model? Maybe the numbers for the paid products just weren't there and they see this exit as a positive for the team?

It's an obvious partnership because Void Cloud was built on Cloudflare anyway, so having Cloudflare buying them directly just means that both companies don't need to carve out their own margin. Cloudflare is also happy to fund the work on Vite, Oxc, et al. while also having a more direct answer for Vercel and Next.js.

With all that said, I don't think we can extrapolate that their business wasn't doing well or that they couldn't have raised more money. Cloudflare probably just offered a good enough deal that it didn't make sense to try to grind it out.

What I really mean is that when M&A happens, it seems like a lot of people think the acquirer is the only one with any agency, and that's not true at all.

> is Zed capable of using a Claude Code Subscription?

Yes. Zed connects to Claude Code via ACP.

Oh, yea here's all the proof you need. Even Zed themselves admit you won't be able to use Claude Code via ACP via Subscription: https://zed.dev/blog/terminal-threads

So yea, bcherny didn't reply to me but as far as i can tell - No, Zed nor VSCode will have Claude Code natively in it. The best we can do is embed a Terminal into the editor and run CC in that.

With that said, because bcherny advertised VSCode, i'm going to guess VSCode is going to get special treatment. Really annoying.

to be clear, i'm referring to the recent fact where it appears that they're disabling all Claude Code (Subscription) usage from the SDK. Which ACP would be included on.

As usual though it's not super clear exactly what is allowed or not.

They most certainly are. This is Jevons paradox.