Gathered from the FAQ, you only pay if you want Canva AI features. Yes, you create a Canva account, which is free, so that you can get your license. With old affinity, you also needed an account to receive the license.
In the new UI the ai features are tucked into an additional “studio” like how layout, raster, and vector are individual studios. You can choose which studios have a visible toggle, so you can hide the Canva AI toggle if you don’t want to see it.
Perhaps it gets worse over time. But right now, they’ve just made it free.
It sounds like you're positioning this as a counter to the post you're replying to, but I think that is actually what they're complaining about.
> you only pay if you want Canva AI features
Right, so what they've done is tied their business model as a product to AI features and nothing else. That's not "oh good, I can use it for free", it's "oh no, they are no longer incentivised to care about the parts of the product I wanted".
the ai bubble has already popped!!! the biggest tech companies on the planet who are spending insane amounts of capex on “ai” keep reporting insane earnings reports one after another, things are popping left & right
this question could be reasonably asked of any company's capex expenditure, no? reasonably I will trust until proven otherwise that companies as successful as our biggest ones know what they are doing vs. 76.89% of HN claiming some sort of fictitious "bubble"
it is same thing we keep hearing for about a decade now how "recession is imminent" which of course it'll eventually happen, it always does, you just have to predict it for 10-15 years and one day you'll be right... same thing with this "bubble" - there will eventually be a "pull back" - prolonged capex of this magnitude is not something any company will do but it is getting so boring here on HN hearing about this amazing 'bubble' that is about to pop and we just keep sitting and waiting for this magical moment while the companies, in a very, very, very bad economy are crushing earnings...
I have to admit but unifying all apps and let me choose which panels to see it a good improvement over the old apps. Plus the fact that now I can share the editable files with others that don't use affinity and they can just download the app for free. I agree, in the future it might turn into another adobe but for now its nice.
> That means you can power the Mini dish for two to three hours from something like an Anker Prime 27,650mAh (99.54Wh) power bank, or a little over an hour with smaller 10,000mAh (40Wh) portable batteries you probably already have laying about. It requires a USB-C PD power source with a minimum rating of 100W (20V/5A).
I 100% agree. You mention some pretty scary KG numbers there though (but we’ll done)! I just wanted to mention to readers that even squatting a ‘measly’ 50KG or deadlifting 30KG can immensely help with back pain and the physical challenges everyday life throws at you.
> I just wanted to mention to readers that even squatting a ‘measly’ 50KG or deadlifting 30KG
Yes -- this is really important to contextualize.
Barbell resistance training is actually two things:
1) A method of exercise that has a variety of well-quantified health benefits including improvements in strength, bone density, and connective tissue. More muscle also means you can eat more without getting fat.
2) A competitive strength sport (generally called powerlifting; weightlifting usually refers to the explosive overhead lifts seen at the Olympics).
Your strength goals can, and should, depend entirely on your objectives. If you're aiming to compete, a 150KG squat and 200KG deadlift would put you around the median in the lowest male weight classes.
It's also relative to your body weight. A 150 kg squat for someone who weighs 118 kg (i.e. me) is not that impressive. Whereas an 80 kg squat if you weigh 80 kg is extremely impressive. You should be aiming to lift 1x-1.5x your body weight, over time.
Yeah i thought if you look at the top performers it actually gets harder if you are heavy to keep with lighter performers in terms of multiplier. The lighter performers win the multiplier game.
As someone who came very late to this from an unfit childhood: annoyingly, they're right. I started lifting at _40_, and after a couple of years I can deadlift 100kg vs my own weight of 90kg. All the tables of "expected" lifting values are laughably high and clearly compiled on enthusiastic 20 year olds. But it's been very helpful for my energy levels and to balance against my sedentary job.
For me, bearing in mind all this injury discussion, I've focused on form 100%. When doing free weight exercises, this forces a whole bunch of other, secondary, "stabilization" muscles to some work. It's those, especially if they end up spending all day "locked" because of your posture, which can produce a lot of the minor pains of age, so give them a workout.
These numbers seem off? Everywhere I look online even the numbers for untrained men are higher than that. I just came back to the gym, am the weakest person there, slightly weaker than 'untrained' numbers on the internet and I can do more.
That link lists the averages among the 21,000 users of StrengthLog. I'm sure the average normal human who doesn't use a weight training logging app is way lower.
For example the beginner on there is 76kg. I think it'd be a bad idea for a guy who's 40 years old, untrained and out of shape to rock up and deadlift 50kg, even just for one rep. He wouldn't know what to expect, he'd get the form wrong, he'd probably hurt his back. People who aren't trained should start with the bar, sometimes they're better off starting with even less than the bar and that is fine!
I believe beginner here is not untrained. There were a few links with different categories (all above the 30kg deadlift, 50kg squat for the lowest one). I only shared the first one in my comment.
30kg DL is 5kg on each side of a 20kg bar which is less than I've lifted my very first time and I was pretty unfit and I'm sure the vast majority of untrained people can lift that. Hell, that's easier than bar-only bench press, which most people can also easily do on their first try.
I am not clear on what conclusions we are discussing exactly.
* 20kg-30kg makes sense for an untrained person's first lift, it sounds like we agree. With DL you need some plates on the bar to get the right height so 5kg bumper plates or something is common.
* All of this is still way below the numbers even for beginners on the site you linked, which again I stress, is a self-selected group of people who were hardcore enough to opt into a performance tracking app of some kind, this is way different from the general population.
* I actually don't agree that the vast majority of people could just bust out, let's say, 10 reps at 30kg of any lift. Women and older men who have never lifted? I really doubt it. A year ago it was hard for me to do 10 body weight squats, no bar no nothing, and most of my middle aged friends who have never exercised are probably still in the same boat. 40% of the US is obese... I think this perspective is biased basically towards young men (lets say under 40).
Numbers are really personal. At 60kg I found it really easy to get strong enough to deadlift even 120kg, cited as between intermediate and advanced on that table, despite in no way being an even intermediate lifter. More like novice at best.
Relative difficulty of different lifts also varies. I found squats and deadlifts extremely difficult, to the point that I reached 1x bodyweight bench press before 1x bodyweight squat.
Beauty of that though is that you can CMD+click on each one and open all 50 into separate tabs, then work on each one whilst the others load in the background. Want to cross-reference? Easy, just shift a tab to a new window. All likely not possible in an SPA, either because links don’t work like links, or because it’ll muck up state.
Why would any webmaster allow any of their content be used to train an AI? What's in it for them?
The deal with searchbots is that you allow indexing because you want to be found. But no such quid-pro-quo occurs when the content is just fed into the maw of an AI trainer.
The rise of website builders like Wix, Squarespace, and Shopify has drastically changed the web design and development industry. As a co-founder and lead developer of a small design/development team, I loved my job and was passionate about creating beautiful and functional websites. However, as more and more clients turned to these DIY platforms, I found it increasingly difficult to justify our higher prices. While our work was more sophisticated and better optimized for SEO, clients often didn't see the value in paying £10,000 or more for it.
Ultimately, I realized that our trade had become commoditized, and I made the difficult decision to sell the business and move on. I transitioned to a new role as a Product Manager, and over the years, I've climbed the ranks to become a CTO at a scaling startup. Although I miss the thrill of being a developer and creating websites from scratch, I've found new challenges and fulfillment in my current position.
If you're facing a similar situation, I'd suggest exploring other avenues to keep your passion for development alive. Consider taking on side projects as a hobby, collaborating with industry friends to start an indie project, or even teaching others about web development. Just be sure to carefully review any non-compete agreements with your current employer before pursuing any new ventures. Remember, although your job may have changed, your passion for creating great websites can still thrive in new ways.
It's not just that the budgets are harder to justify; it's also that prospective clients consider themselves to be experts. Having your judgement and expertise consistently overruled is disheartening and you often end up just following instructions, sapping any joy from the (diminishing and cheaper) role.
I started my web business 25 years ago. 5ish years ago I started photographing and filming travel content, primarily with a drone. More fun, more interesting, better feedback, etc. When building my own web projects though, I still love it.
In many cases, the client is right. I remember a college buddy who designed websites complaining about a problem client. Apparently he wrote their site in Silverlight, and the restaurant wasn’t thrilled someone had to download a plug-in to see their hours.
LOL my first "production" website was made around 1997/8 and it required people to install FLASH — not a hit, and no traffic either — because I just wanted it to have this certain featureset =P
Some have very skewed notions about UI/UX that don’t conform to how most users (and pertinently, their customers) use web apps; but they will insist on it.
That is what the web has become. A platform to selling products.
But why did it have to be so? Why couldn't it also have been a medium for expressing beauty?
It still HOSTS a lot of art - art in the form of images.
But the number of truly beautiful artistic WEBSITES - in CSS, HTML, etc, are few and far between.
Hell, I remember the heyday of Flash - before Apple smothered it. There were some INCREDIBLY gorgeous websites with absolutely incredible animations and visuals.
Of course they were dogshit for accessibility, discoverability, information presentation, etc. Not to mention the apalling security/performance of Flash. So I don't wish the whole web was like that.
Some may know better for very specific parts of their business, but in the majority of cases, I would say they do not. More often than not, they're the ones pushing for some overwrought site with scrolljacking and needless animation or side-scrolling and the like.
The gripes about web sites you see on HN - they're the things clients insist on.
I think the effect on the job market of (things like) midjourney is much more drastic and steeply immediate than that historical example (not sure if it's a true story or hypothetical? not sure if it was written by chat-gpt?).
I mean, I'm sure many developers over the years have found their jobs disappear, and many contracting companies have gone out of business due to changed market. But at least through now, even with the layoffs, jobs developing websites are still plentiful. (Perhaps that won't be true in the future, sure).
I feel like OP is probably right that they are going to have a lot of trouble getting a job creating 3D art, that the job market has _drastically_ shrunken almost overnight, beyond the effect that wix/squarespace/etc had. (Although of course even in your example, it's a shrunken market)
All I was really getting at was that it sapped the love (and money) out of the job, like the OP was suggesting for them and Midjourney. Once your art/talent has become something that either the common person or a machine can do, your only option as a career is to move on and diversify. It’s unfortunate, but has been happening for decades in all industries. Anyway, just sharing my experience of it happening to me.
> the words have a warmth that generated text lacks
Reminds me of my philosophy teacher in high-school that gave me the best grade of the year and praised how "personal" it felt, for an essay I had bought online for 3 euros.
The irony of it still makes me chuckle 15 years later.
Using this tool on the comment yields a 77.6% fake score. To give (pretty limited) contrast, a response from ChatGPT gives 99.9% fake, and another comment from this thread gives 0.1% fake.
I assume that means the comment text was GPT-assisted, with some moderate editing from a human.
I checked this tool on some of my comments. Mostly it reported around "100% real". However https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35259575 this comment was generated by ChatGPT and it was also reported as 97.6% real. And this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35286822 was reported as 88.79% fake but I wrote it myself. So I wouldn't trust this tool too much, even from my very limited testing it wasn't very reliable.
I asked chatGTP to "write a hacker news like comment on the rise of website builders effect on web design and development industry and how to found joy in other roles and keeping programming in side hobby" and it gave me a 97% real comment by the score on this site, not convincing.
I think it is likely the complete opposite of trouble. It helped them write their comment faster and in such a way that it was easy to understand. This is one of the best use cases for chatgpt. Rather than spend minutes trying to get the right wording, tell chatgpt what you want to say in a few short notes and get a well formed coherent text.
Now if this is a good thing, that’s up for debate - although overall I personally would say yes.
I think the point here is that for a group of people (I would argue most) the primary goal of a comment is to broadcast your ideas, with the language being used to convey them of secondary concern, of which this part could be delegated to AI.
The GPT-detector is fascinating (and seemed to work pretty well on some inputs I tested)
On the other hand, this next paragraph is scored as 84% fake and I'm quite sure Churchill didn't have Chat-GPT to help:
> We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the new world, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.
IMO, we must not be too quick to conclude that any given text was created/assisted by an LLM based on a scoring algorithm alone. (A low GPT likelihood is probably reliable [for now, until that starts being gamed].)
If you offered me even odds, I'd wager that the subject comment was 100% hand-written.
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Or Reddit. Let's not forget what LLMs are trained on. It's not just Wikipedia and some official text corpora, it's Reddit dumps and other regular Internet conversations. If you learned how to write English on-line, there's a chance you've internalized a style similar to how LLMs often respond.
(In fact, I often feel like I sound too much like ChatGPT myself.)
100% truthfully, I wrote it all myself, but tweaked the opening paragraph with ChatGPT to improve my grammar slightly. It’s a great tool, and one that should not be dismissed, just like spell checkers and the grammar checkers of old in the likes on MS Word. Maybe it does come across a bit ChatGPT-like which is unfortunate I suppose.
As for the suggestions of me asking it to write the comment from prompts, then I’m afraid that’s 100% wrong.
I’ve noticed a large amount of responses from chatgpt start the second/third paragraph with “however, “ or a similar adverb. It will always strive to provide a “balanced” view, even on heavily one sided subjects.
That’s actually fairly common. The really unsettling question is “why is the moon exactly the same size in the sky as the sun?”. A little bit smaller and we wouldn’t see full solar eclipses, a little bit bigger and we wouldn’t see the suns corona during an eclipse. Another unsettling feature is that the moon is moving further away from the earth so in a few million years’ time, we won’t even have full solar eclipses. So now what are the chances that in the 4B years the earth’s been around, we’re alive at the relatively short time period that we can witness this earth/moon/sun relationship?
Shooting from the hip… But I bet it’s actually not that crazy rare for moons and suns to be a similar size in the sky of world that could harbor life. Factors at play: habitatal zones of different stars, the size of those stars, and the distribution of moon sizes for planets that could harbor life.
Out of all the possible numbers, what are the odds? 1 in a billion! Two consecutive 0's! And two consecutive twos! What do you think they mean? And 5 in between? Well 5 times 2 is 10 which ends in a 0. But it starts with 1971, which is only 1 year off from the start of Unix time, which can't be a coincidence! etc.
