You have a point. They're not similar. OTOH, people do compare them. I think Apple realizes this and the Macbook Neo is a brilliant move.
It doesn't cost $1000 to get into the MacBook experience anymore, so drastically more people will be buying them for their kids and more families will have MacOS as their default.
It would be a brilliant move if it wasn't castrated with 8 GB, even my netbook from 2009 got upgraded to 16 GB during its lifetime, which ended in 2024.
A netbook from 2009, already had the capability to get RAM sticks up to 16 GB in total, go figure!
But 8 GB on a Mac is way different (in a positive way) from 16 GB on a different OS. On Windows 11, I can’t even imagine anything lower than 32 GB being a decent experience.
I got the lowest of the low MacBooks on a black friday deal years ago for my wife that only had 8GB, thinking the same way. "It'll be fine for her needs." It was more than fine. It was good. Got myself one a month later. I don't know why but RAM is different on macOS.
In the long run, I think we'll see more iPad-only families. The home computer is practically non-existent outside gaming niches or work-issued machines. We've had $700-800 Macbook Air models on sale for years now, same for the Mac Mini - little has changed. As cutesy as the shared computer ideal is, I see most people gravitating towards their phones and away from general purpose computing.
One reason I stopped buying a new iPad was because the hardware is great but the software prevents multiple users. Not all families can afford or would like to have one phone per person as well as one tablet per person. IMO, Apple is losing money by crippling the iPad.
I thought the tablet space is pretty much dead? I don't see many on the shelves at the local hardware store (which I walk by mostly of curiosity). It seems all laptops, with a sizeable share of foldable - and even these are way more present than tablets. So no, I think the tablet train has long left (exception being the standing workers in some areas).
You ask Gemini to make an Elsa and Anna Frozen-themed coloring book page. It says no, that would be copyright infringement. So you ask it to make something as close as possible but without infringing. It happily obliges.
Love the idea. Thoughts from a UI/UX point of view, on mobile:
* Focus on the policy stuff since that's your differentiator. Put it front and center, currently it's below the "trending news". Nobody needs another trending news feed. I'd cut it entirely.
* Make your differentiator hyper-obvious at a glance on the front page. Right now your above-the-fold is dominated by a wall of AI generated text. It should include a tagline for your site and visuals that people won't get elsewhere.
* Your UI screams "vibe coded" which does not build confidence. Look to other authoritative sites for visual cues - consider a serif for headlines, make your spacing more thoughtful and consistent, reduce or remove your border radius.
Thanks! I'll look into these UX/UI ideas. As for the news, it's front and center because I want Govbase to be a site/app people regularly visit and policy does move slow. Even when a bill is introduced it can take weeks for the actual text content of the bill to show up on congress.gov. Plus on weekends/recess the government doesn't move.
I am planning to bring out more of the impact highlights from the policies to see what's "trending" or what certain reps are working on but just plans for now.
Why chase engagement? If policy is slow-moving then people can visit weekly. Or make an RSS feed. Unless you're planning to go ad monetized or worse...
There's nuance between wanting to build something people use regularly vs "chasing engagement". Even if he decides to run this as a non-profit, individuals are more likely to donate to something they use regularly and institutions are more likely to fund something with active usage. I would assume that the costs to make all these LLM-API costs are not insignificant. I agree with the previous comment that the policy is the differentiator though and hopefully there's a way to drive usage without devolving into a just another news aggregator.
That doesn't make sense to me. I don't need to "engage" daily with MSF to feel like my donation is valuable. I can go days or weeks at a time without using or even thinking much about the Internet Archive, Wikipedia, or my local classical radio station. I almost never hear or see anything about my local food bank/drive organization except when I begrudgingly check a local Facebook group and happen to scroll past a post showing off whatever community dinner they just did.
There is no legitimate reason for a project like this to prioritize a general newsfeed, as opposed to a very specific newsfeed focused on legislation, regulation activity, and court cases. I can think of many interesting and useful ways to integrate the news into a government activity tracker. Yet another slopfeed of whatever nonsense is trending in the news, is not one of them.
It's a shame because I love the idea, but I can't say I trust the creator much at all. I guess now with AI it's easy enough for me to go whip up my own.
I think if you found me on LinkedIn you'd find this comment very ironic. I'm trying to perfect "stories" more before I make them the main feed since they're the core of bringing news, policy, and social posts together.
The idea is to have ordinary people read their news with the facts and the impacts. You don't need to engage with MSF or your food bank for them to make an impact. Bringing policy impact to news does require engagement - it requires interest. This tool isn't for policy researchers and that is exactly why it's not the exact thing you described. Every day people need to use it not people starving or in a war zone.
In this case, I'd say only share news where you have some kind of structured regulatory stuff attached to it. Like sure, Trump started a war, that's noteworthy. Follow that up directly with a link out to structured tally of what reps have said, when was the last time a President did something similar, what are the relevant regulations, etc.
Rather than try to compete in the "current events" space you might have more success in more differentiated channels like having people subscribe to issues, subscribe to reps... News should be part of it but you should lead as much as possible with your differentiator. I bet you could sell enterprise level subscriptions for industry-relevant regulatory news.
1. Do you see any downsides to storing your graph as markdown files on filesystem, rather than, say, a graph DB? I have little experience with either but I imagine there would be perf advatages to certain operations on a graph DB at least?
2. If you're using Obsidian-like .md files, why not use the Obsidian format? I bet some folks would love to have an AI coworker helping build and maintain their Obsidian vault.
1. We chose Markdown deliberately so each node is human-readable and editable. The idea is that a project or person note represents the current state of that entity, so you can just open it and understand what’s going on. That also lets users add updates manually, for example from offline conversations that aren’t captured in email or meetings.
In terms of performance, the graph mainly acts as an index over structured notes, and retrieval happens at the note level rather than through complex graph queries. So for our use case, plain files have been sufficient and keep the system simple and transparent.
2. It’s actually Obsidian-compatible. The notes use Obsidian-style backlinks, and you can open the folder directly as an Obsidian vault if you’d like.
That also struck me as a pretty weird quote to highlight. Someone who "seems like they’ll get what they want" sounds more like a bully more than a persuader or value creator.
reply