You Are in a Box

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Mobile/desktop “boxes” and user agency

  • Many feel “boxed in” most acutely on phones: instead of the phone acting as a user’s agent, siloed apps control data and interactions.
  • Desired fix: clear, open APIs and better semantics so agents can compare options (e.g., restaurant menus) and transact on the user’s behalf, rather than platforms and gatekeepers steering business.
  • iOS Shortcuts is cited as an example of powerful but artificially limited tooling; app vendors often avoid exposing automation hooks because it threatens engagement metrics.
  • Sandboxing and data exfiltration (especially via cloud AI) create justified mutual distrust, which also blocks interoperability.

OS, shells, and interoperability models

  • Several comments riff on “objects and actions” as the real primitives, but note it’s hard to expose safely and generally.
  • Comparisons:
    • Bash-style text pipes (“exterior” design) vs richer-but-incompatible structured shells (PowerShell, Nushell).
    • COM and Java/JVM as earlier attempts at language‑level interop within one runtime “box.”
  • One commenter argues shells must remain “exterior glue” (text/bytes between processes) to scale across heterogeneous systems; typed, in‑VM designs create extra layers of glue and complexity.

Plan 9, Unix philosophy, and security

  • Multiple people say the post echoes Plan 9’s “everything is a file” and per‑process namespaces: the environment as a composable space, not a prison.
  • Debate over whether Plan 9 treated security as an afterthought or had a coherent story that evolved (Factotum, TLS services).
  • Some dismiss Plan 9 as a failed, over‑hyped Unix alternative; others push back, calling that an uninformed take.

Data formats, schemas, and models

  • Several frame the problem as primarily about data, not code: data is locked in proprietary models; there’s little standardization of representations.
  • Skepticism about a universal “model of everything” registry; suggestion that LLMs might dynamically translate schemas between programs.
  • Discussion of SOAP vs GraphQL: some see them as equivalent in power; others argue GraphQL is superior when decoupled from underlying DB schemas.
  • Apache Arrow/Parquet gets praise as a way to share columnar data without repeated (de)serialization, but mutation performance and distinction between “data” and “data model” are raised.

Style and capitalization flamewar

  • A large subthread fixates on the article’s unconventional capitalization (all‑lowercase or, via referrer‑based CSS, ALL CAPS for HN readers).
  • Some find it cognitively tiring, disrespectful, or “pretentious”; others see it as expressive, conversational, or as signaling non‑AI, non‑corporate voice.
  • Meta‑point: several note that style complaints drown out substantive discussion and violate HN’s guideline about griping over formats.

Other proposed perspectives/solutions

  • Emacs/Smalltalk/Pharo and personal OS experiments are cited as “more open” environments, but criticized for fragility, lack of types, and practicality.
  • A DSL for web pipelines that passes JSON between dynamically loaded steps is offered as a composable, extensible alternative to monolithic apps.
  • One commenter claims the boring but effective answer is simply: keep your own data in normal filesystem files; SaaS and mobile platforms mainly re‑hide that universal interface.