So what?! This does not prove anything! There are stones all around us, but they don't assemble themselves into beautiful, majestic stone buildings! All ingredients of concrete are around us, but we don't see them turning into concrete and pouring themselves into freeways, bridges, and all kinds of much less complex than living organisms!
So what? We are not really experienced in judging how chemical processes work across (a half of) billion year timespan. Or how can intense lighting and volcanic activity across similar timespans affect the probabilities of outcomes. And so on
Why is this process not ongoing now, then, when there are tons of prefab elements of life, i.e., it should be easier today than it was a billion years ago? A billion years is not as long as you think!
The message matters waaaaay less than the messenger.
Qatar used to be pro-Iran until Iran started striking them 2 weeks ago.
Back when the entire Gulf blockaded Qatar from 2017-21, Qatar depended on Iran [0] for food. Qatar and Iran also had a gentleman's agreement to collaborate with each other to export LNG [1]. Both Qatar and Iran also collaborated with each other to support Hamas [2] and the Houthis [3].
The fact that a Qatari national employed by a think tank that is patronized by the Qatari royal family [4] has published this piece in Qatar's state-owned media is a massive about face and signals how livid Qatari policymakers are.
Heck, Qatar's interior ministry has begun arresting Iranian sympathizers [5], forced Hamas to denounce Iran [6], and taken control of Qatar's subreddit: "You might be anonymous but we aren’t, the mod team is known to the authorities and we’re trying our best to cooperate with them and comply with all the guidelines." [7].
The kind of pro-Iran state that has hosted the biggest US military base in the Middle East for decades.
International politics are messy, as there are too many actors with their own agendas. You try to avoid taking sides and to stay out of trouble, but sometimes you end up in trouble anyway due to the choices others made.
> The kind of pro-Iran state that has hosted the biggest US military base in the Middle East for decades...
Al Udeid and Exxon's stake in QatarEnergy is Qatar's tribute to the US to not be added onto sanctions lists for conducting business with Iran.
Al Udeid Airbase was only established in 1996 after Iran and Qatar began collaborating on LNG extraction in the early 1990s and after Iran helped put down a coup attempt in Qatar in 1996 [0].
Qatar's Energy Minister - who is also CEO of QatarEnergy - is also a member of Banu Ka'b, an Arab clan that still has blood ties in Ahvaz today.
> International politics are messy
I know. I used to work in the policy space. People really overestimate the history of the US presence in West Asia.
The only states we had deep continuous ties with in the region were Turkiye (their military junta was always pro-American and a core part of Operation Gladio) and Iran until the Shah was deposed.
Israel's primary defense benefactor until the 1990s was France, Saudi's primary defense benefactor until the 1980s was France (it was French special forces that put down al-Otaybi in 1979), and the Gulf+Jordan's was the UK then France.
The US on really entered the region in earnest after the 1973 oil crisis but pulled back after the Iran Embassy Crisis and the Beirut bombings which led the Reagan admin to decide to let the French and their allies+defense partners the Israelis and Turks manage that headache (but we'd gladly bankroll any anti-Soviet activities in the region), and we didn't return to the region until the Gulf War.
Because that's by design. The windows are meant to have different corner radius, they even explained it at WWDC. Then people forgot and rediscovered it again, like it was some new thing.
I am not saying that it's a good idea to have different corner radius, just that it's nothing new.
> In the new design system, windows now have a softer, more generous corner radius, which varies based on the style of window. Windows with toolbars now use a larger radius, which is designed to wrap concentrically around the glass toolbar elements, scaling to match the size of the toolbar. Titlebar-only windows retain a smaller corner radius, wrapping compactly around the window controls. These larger corners provide a softer feel and elegant concentricity to the window…
Just a bunch of words that raised no red flags, maybe sounded like a decent idea even, but when you see it how is your reaction not “oh, that’s bad”
I feel like this is the design process. You have ideas, they sound ok, you try them out, and then immediately you revert a lot of them. The ideas without the taste to know when not to do something is becoming the new Apple way
I think what they're saying is that larger radii are for 'real windows' that have toolbars and such but there are 'mini windows' and those get smaller radii. It doesn't seem well enough baked for them to release it like it is but there are other UI problems that I've been annoyed about for a long time (in particular shadows around window boundaries so you can never get a truly flat tiled experience).
Rounded corners (and the utterly massive drag area next to them) are touchbar 2.0. Features that no one asked for, has questionable value, and that provides marginal benefit even for its intended audience (touchscreen macs, no doubt).
Except it kind of fails at that too. The window corners seem to be either based on those squircle things or some kind of other varying radii curve which eases out into sides much more gradually than proper circles. The window buttons (close, minimize) the round toolbar buttons anchored to top right corner are based on proper circles. Attempting to center circle in a varying curvature corner results in varying spacing between the circle and corner, which defeats the whole point of why different windows have different corner size (not calling it radius because they are not circles).
When the top right corner contains a search field instead of rounded button, that also seems to use varying curvature instead of capsule with proper circles at the ends. Still results in varying spacing between window corner and the toolbar content.
And that's just the 2 top corners. Attempts to align top corners result in even bigger mismatch with the rest of the window content. For example calculator -> it has a grid of round buttons. While the window corners might match top bar (as good as they can due to different shapes) the main calculation buttons don't match the corners at all.
Similar problem affects many of the popups which have something like confirmation button anchored to bottom right corner.
Rounded scrollbar handle - not aligned with bottom left corner size, instead it awkwardly gets cut of by different amount in each program.
Menus also have this disease. The non circular corner curve of overall menu shape extends way past the corner of item highlight resulting in varying spacing and making it feel almost like whole menu has bulged out instead of flat sides.
In MacOS 26 it's only weirder, because as you say - due to squircle window corners, now we have this constantly varying distance to the edge.
EDIT: I "get" apple's fascination to squircle, but why they made it such a big radius. Probably no one would've complained if they just have changed from current ~15-20px rounded corners into ~15-20px squircles, but they went 50px+ on toolbared windows.
I'm starting to suspect most people at Apple (and Microsoft) just spend time in a browser these days and so they don't notice how the desktop has gone shitty.
I won't be public shaming, but on a .NET podcast I just heard of an internal Microsoft project that took 7 years (!), to become public, it was a plain single Assembly .NET library nothing special (1 DLL).
reply