You will need the macOS server app for this to work: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/argly-server/id6755750868
I built this project because I wanted to keep vibe :D coding at night, but didn't want to bring my entire laptop with me.
My new flow has become if I'm developing iOS apps:
1. I log into Argly from my phone, it connects/ screen-shares my desktop and I can control all the apps or send keyboard strokes
2. I'll have cursor open, feed it a prompt, wait for the changes to be applied
3. Then it deploys to my phone through wifi from across the house. This works decently
I would be interested in how this could be useful for you folks!
Considering the downvotes I got, I suppose I was out of line suggesting a wager, but I've yet to see convincing evidence for why blockchain tech can't work. Sure it's overhyped way beyond what it deserves and it hasn't found its "killer app" or niche yet, but that doesn't mean it won't.
Nano's my favorite coin. It's fee-less, near-instant, and secure. Its largest flaw (and one all coins share at this point) is its tendency to fluctuate in value. But this problem is soon to be overcome by stable coins. Once that's done, its only remaining disadvantage will be lack of adoption. And if the product's right, I don't see any reason why a superior product won't gain market share given enough time. And it's not like crypto is under some investor enforced deadline to reach a certain market share, it's got all the time in the world.
Anyone care to point out any flaws in my thinking?
As to your questions, you can spend it some places. I think newegg takes it, Valve used to take it with Steam, etc. There are corner delis who take it, I'm not sure about yours. Your employees may be ok with you paying them in it, but that's an agreement you have to have with them.
To your last question -- no, I wouldn't think so at least for now.
I put this together to allow managers to reach out to their employees via text messages.
With this service, you can send out scheduled pre-canned messages to target groups.
That's not a fair comparison. Imagine if you hired an electrician for no money, and you kept using them over and over again. I expect if I were to pay for an alternative to not have my privacy violated.
If you search for Facebook on Google Play then you'll see the word "free" under Facebook icon [1]. It is interesting ,that the app page [2] doesn't have this word, but it doesn't say that Facebook is going to upload your call list to the server either. So they advertise the app as "free".
Google asks devs how much an app costs to install not to use.
Even if the app has IAP the value gets rendered as “Free” with an additional notice.
On that note Google will also take down your app if it doesn’t have a comprehensive privacy policy. And it also requires that policy to be accessible without installing.
They’ve been cracking down on things as detailed as “leaking” clicked URL in troubleshooting logs.
I’m not here to astroturf for companies abusing jargon filled pages of legalese to get you to sign over rights to your data, but you don’t even need to read those to know: “If you’re not paying, you’re the product”. Doubly so if you’re using a service valued at billions of dollars.
Where do they come out and say that? Where do they put a message, in readable english, and not buried under a thousand other things, that says they'll do that?
I agree privacy policy details are opaque, but it takes the bare minimum of skimming to know if the policy is not giving up your data.
It should be clear as day what’s being collected and it’s a failing that it’s not, but there’s also the old adage of “if it’s too good to be true...” doing some due diligence when you’re promised the services of a billion dollar company that’s not charging you is prudent.
Allowing the app to access the contact list doesn't mean that the user allows to upload call history to the server. Maybe they only want to add one of the people from their contact list.
I expect if I were to pay for an alternative to not have my privacy violated.
The whole free versus pay argument is sophistry. Many pay products usurp your privacy. Your television is selling your viewing habits. Your car telematics solution is selling your movements. That operating system is mining your activity to sell you things.
And many free products defend your privacy. Linux, VLC, Firefox, IPF, and on and on. More concerned for your privacy than any other product.
So can we please stop this binary differentiation. It isn't useful.
Not that this would ever happen..probably, but if Amazon were to offer users a $20 amazon store voucher to get users to disable their FB account and port all their pictures to a social media solution they build, I could see myself doing that. This platform would only be accessible to users with Amazon Prime accounts and that would be a way for them to keep it ad-free.
