111–120 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They aren't silliness, they are levers of control and loss of freedom
They are also a barrier to entry that keeps some of the riff raff out.
A similar app in this space that I discovered recently is Supercharge. https://sindresorhus.com/supercharge I was skeptical that I’d find it useful since I can do all of these shell commands and such, but one feature I like is being able to effectively pare the feature set down to just what you need, making for a small but very useful menu.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The user won't learn Full stop. I still talk to people every working day who don't realize that rebooting a computer is actually a real troubleshooting step. They seem to think it's bunk tech support mumbo jumbo rather than a genuinely useful step. It's 2026 and they're still surprised when that works.
> They seem to think it's bunk tech support mumbo jumbo It indeed is. It's a way of coping with systems that are fundamentally illegible and unpredictable. If you have full rights over your machine and you're not running extremely shoddy software, you should never have to reboot your computer to make an issue go away. And rebooting your computer often guarantees that you'll never actually understand whatever issue is…
About two weeks ago, some Adobe Acrobat update introduced a hang that results in “Acrobat won’t open.” Open Task Manager and there’s four to eight stuck processes. Kill them and it works again most of the time, but once in ten it simply doesn’t recover.
Adobe acknowledged the issue to someone on my team. There’s no need for me to understand further; telling the user that a reboot will solve it is prudent advice. It’s on Adobe to fix it. You made assumptions about the environment where I tell people to reboot without understanding the conditions and I have an immediate real world case demonstrating why your statements don’t apply.
I get that there's a market to put command line preferences in a GUI wrapper, but wasn't HN going to limit posts from new accounts? Oh, it's not in Show HN. They found a loophole. Meanwhile, I'm running Claude Code and asking it to make me stupid bespoke things that only I want and I'm not spamming the internet with those tools because they aren't novel or useful for most people and you can have Claude Code build a v…
> Go away, green accounts. Everyone is pretty tired of your presence. I get the frustration with the overload of new vibe-coded tools, but this particular attitude towards new people - can we not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
when you sign an app with your personal dev account.
The way I read that question was: where can other people see this information about me once I’ve published the app? i.e. say I just published an app, where would you navigate to find this info?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't want your name, address, phone number on public display you need to either set up a company or set up some forwarding. If you set up a company, you'll need to get a DUNS number. If you haven't done it before and don't know about the secret shortcut way to do that, it is very annoying to get one. Anyway, I don't see a problem with getting it out the door. People can just choose not to install it if they d…
You don't need to do any of that to sign and notarize an app that you are distributing yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I read that question was: where can other people see this information about me once I’ve published the app? i.e. say I just published an app, where would you navigate to find this info?
If you sign an app your legal name gets embedded into the .app bundle. You can use e.g. `codesign` in the terminal to read it back, or if you publish to the App Store it will be in the UI, along with the others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you sign an app your legal name gets embedded into the .app bundle. You can use e.g. `codesign` in the terminal to read it back, or if you publish to the App Store it will be in the UI, along with the others.
I've seen individual developer's names in the App Store, but the parent comment is also claiming that Address and Phone number is published. I've done a bit of digging, and can't seem to confirm this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen individual developer's names in the App Store, but the parent comment is also claiming that Address and Phone number is published. I've done a bit of digging, and can't seem to confirm this.
In Europe’s App Store I see my address and phone number in the apps I published there - under the “provider” section.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gatekeeper is a travesty and assault on user freedom. Apple should not be in charge of what you run on your computer, at all. Any exception to this should be opt in. If a user wants to insert a third party between themselves and a programmer they can elect to do that. Let’s not forget when Apple’s certificate server was down and suddenly you couldn’t launch apps on macOS, to say nothing of the abuse of user rights.
you're saying security should be optional and up to users? lol