Ernie Smith at Tedium:

I’m seeing email after email suggesting these users built a thing they’re truly passionate about. But if we can’t trust that this passion is real, legit, and from the heart, we’re in trouble.

Take a step back. Is this thing you built a reflection of you?

I think it’s fun and exciting that I’m getting a lot more emails about a lot more new apps. But a fair chunk of those emails are themselves clearly written by an AI chatbot. It’s so obvious. Those go straight in the trash.

Kalley Huang, reporting from San Francisco, and Ana Swanson, from Washington, for The New York Times (gift link):

Apple, which has cited the memory chip shortage for recent price increases, is working with other consumer electronics companies to push for permission to buy memory chips from China, which faces certain restrictions, seven people said.

Apple was in talks in 2022 to buy memory chips from Yangtze Memory Technologies Corporation, or YMTC, but those efforts fizzled under pressure from U.S. lawmakers.

Many officials appear unsympathetic to Apple’s desire to buy Chinese chips, because the company has promised for years to move more of its supply chain to the United States but has made only small steps toward that goal, four people said. Other critics of the plan said that China was also experiencing a similar chip crunch, and had proved itself to be a risky supplier when it restricted its mineral exports last year.

Raffaele Huang and Rolfe Winkler, reporting for The Wall Street Journal (also a gift link):

Apple has been testing memory chips from China’s CXMT across product lines including iPhones and MacBooks, according to people familiar with the matter, as the U.S. company addresses a memory crunch during the artificial-intelligence boom.

Apple has held early talks with CXMT about supplying components with the goal of using them in some devices sold in China, the people said. Apple hopes to win the White House’s blessing to do business with the Chinese company. [...]

Apple often tailors components to its devices to maximize performance. Using standard CXMT memory chips could force Apple to redesign certain parts of its products. Industry analysts also say CXMT’s technology still trails its foreign competitors, in part because the company’s access to the most sophisticated chip-making equipment is restricted.

At present, CXMT wouldn’t be a panacea for Apple. The Chinese company has maxed out its production capacity this year, leaving little room for new international clients, the people familiar with the matter said.

The gist of both reports is that just like in 2022, Apple might not get permission from the U.S. government to use Chinese RAM, even for devices sold in China. And, even if they do secure permission, it might not actually help much with the supply crunch.

My thanks to WorkOS for, once again, sponsoring DF last week. What’s the best way to connect AI agents to your API? REST is great for human developers; MCP serves the agents. Many teams treat REST and MCP as competing standards, and through choice or necessity, pick one. But they ought not be considered rivals. They’re separate layers. Most MCP servers just call REST internally to do the real work. The best ones don’t convert every endpoint into a tool, they focus on what the agents are actually trying to accomplish.

That layered approach also means shipping OAuth 2.1 with scoped tokens. WorkOS AuthKit already speaks that spec, so you skip building an auth provider on top. Check out WorkOS’s breakdown on MCP vs. REST.

Yesterday I published an article titled “App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours”. I have retracted it. Its premise was so fundamentally wrong that there’s no point merely correcting or editing it. Even the title, as I explain below, was inaccurate. Although the original is now retracted, I’m not memory-holing it. The text of the original story is available, for transparency and accountability, in plain text (Markdown, natch) and PDF (preserving original presentation). Both of those versions include a preface at the top linking to this retraction. The URL for the original story now redirects to this one that you are currently reading.

To the best of my recollection, this is the first post I’ve retracted in the 24 years I’ve been writing Daring Fireball. I hope it’s the last. I was misled, both overtly and through omissions, in several ways, but what I publish is my responsibility, and I apologize for the error.

Terry Godier first came to my attention in February, when I linked to his excellent interactive essay on RSS feed reader design, “Phantom Obligation”, which essay introduced Current, Godier’s new RSS reader that he made to exemplify the ideas from his essay. Current is, deservedly, a bit of a breakout hit. (E.g., David Pierce, at The Verge, put it on a very short list of iOS-exclusive indie apps that keep him from switching to Android.) In March I linked to another interactive essay from Godier, “The Last Quiet Thing”, and again in April to a post regarding the App Store’s 5-star review system. I struck up an iMessage correspondence with Godier around when I first linked to his work.

Yesterday Godier posted “Browsers Have Standards, the App Store Has Judgment”. As originally published, that post contained these two paragraphs:

A while ago I tried to submit an iOS app for Dark Hours, my astronomy website for normal people. It was rejected on the grounds that it was astrology.

It has no tarot function, no horoscopes, and nothing that I, or anyone else I’ve asked, would associate with astrology.

Those paragraphs, at this writing (August 8, 11:00 pm ET), have been deleted and replaced by this:

Note: the original version of this post had a section here about an astronomy app I am working on that began as an astrology app and was rejected after having the astrology content removed. App store [sic] review reached out to me and let me know that they had apparently never been given the updated build and that the app should be fine to submit now.

You can now see the problem that has led me to fully retract my original post, given that my post was entirely predicated on the premise that Godier’s original description of the rejected app was true — that the app “has no tarot function, no horoscopes, and nothing that I, or anyone else I’ve asked, would associate with astrology.” The truth is, the app, as originally submitted by Godier to the App Store (under the name “Asterly”, not “Dark Hours”), was entirely dedicated to astrology, not astronomy, and did in fact include a “Tarot card of the day” feature amongst other occultist horseshit.

The grounds of Apple’s original App Store rejection of the app, and the rejection’s upholding by the App Review Board, were correct.¹ I wrongly took Godier at his word, both in his public blog post and in private iMessage correspondence yesterday, that the rejection wasn’t just merely debatable, but completely and rather preposterously ungrounded. Whether Godier ever submitted a build of “Asterly” to the App Store that contained no occult horseshit and only the hard-science astronomy features that were present in his “Dark Hours” website that was available for the last week, I don’t know. But I have no reason to believe that he did.

My disdain for astrology is so utter, and my esteem for Godier’s previous work so high, that it simply never occurred to me that he might have actually made and submitted to the App Store an astrology app, let alone that he’d then feign surprise and frustration that an astrology app was rejected for being an astrology app. I showed him a draft of my post before publication, to make sure I had the story straight, and he offered not a word of caution, only gratitude for my drawing attention to the matter.

It gets messier. Godier’s astrology app that he submitted to the App Store back in January was named “Asterly”. That was still the name when the App Review Board upheld its rejection in April. According to Godier, frustrated by the App Store’s rejection, he ported the astronomy version to the web, launching it last week under the name “Dark Hours” at the domain darkhours.io. (This is why it was incorrect for me, in the very title of my post, to claim that Apple had rejected an app named “Dark Hours”. They rejected an app named “Asterly” and had never seen an app from Godier named “Dark Hours”.) Yesterday, after I linked to Godier’s post and Hacker News then linked to my post, Godier’s “Dark Hours” (with a space) came to the attention (and justifiable surprise) of Miguel Beher, creator of an open-source “astrophotography and dark-sky planner” project named DarkHours (no space). Beher’s GitHub project contains the source code, and the actual web app is freely available at the domain darkhours.app. In an uncomfortable exchange between Beher and Godier on Bluesky, Beher pointed out that Godier’s Dark Hours had the same bug as Beher’s that routed people to “random fields in Mexico”. Earlier today, Godier took his web app down and redirected his darkhours.io domain to Beher’s darkhours.app.

At the end of my now-retracted post yesterday, assuming I had righteously and rightly skewered Apple for an egregiously erroneous App Store review rejection, I wrote:

Mistakes happen. But in a functioning system mistakes get corrected, and mistakes as obvious as this one get corrected almost instantly and include a quick apology for the conflation.

Obviously it was I who was mistaken. This article is my correction, and I apologize to all who read and believed my now-retracted post, and to the reviewers at the App Store whose competence (if not literacy) I besmirched. I am deeply sorry about that. Won’t happen again.

Tariq Panja, reporting for The New York Times:

The five men should have been in a celebratory mood. FIFA had just pulled off a World Cup that broke records on a number of fronts. Its spectacular culmination, the final, was a day away from kickoff.

But their mood was anything but jubilant. The men, a group of top directors known as the FIFA bureau of the management board, had been summoned to a hastily organized meeting at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Manhattan, according to three people familiar with the discussions speaking on condition of anonymity because the talks were private. The directors had until midnight to sign off on a plan that threatened to change soccer forever and would almost certainly lead to a major schism among the sport’s leaders.

The project purported to sell a 20 percent stake in FIFA to a group of investors led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Such a move would put into private hands a portion of the World Cup, an event that has been run and controlled by FIFA, a nonprofit in Zurich, for 96 years.

I don’t know what’s dumber — this stupid corrupt scheme to privatize the World Cup, or me, for not assuming from the start that the Trump family was involved in it somehow.

Joseph Cox, writing for 404 Media (paywalled, sans gift links, alas):

Consulting giant Accenture is trying to figure out how to stop non-technical workers from blowing through companies’ AI token budget on trivial tasks like converting PDFs to presentation slides, according to leaked audio obtained by 404 Media. Across the industry Accenture is seeing “soaring token spend,” according to the audio. [...] It also undercuts the narrative that superpowered engineers generating mountains of code are behind the AI boom. In many cases it is non-technical staff burning through tokens for non-specialized tasks. [...]

At one point in the meeting, Kwak and Eduardo Salamanca de Diego, senior manager of product management at the company’s Center for Advanced AI, start presenting about what is described as “token ops.”

Kwak says he knows people aren’t using slides these days, but he has some. As he appears to be preparing to present, Stuart Henderson, Accenture’s client group lead, interrupts. He jokes he hopes Kwak didn’t just convert a PDF into images and then into Markdown files. “I’m learning that’s one of the big token chewers,” Henderson says. “Turning PDFs into Markdown: is that right?”

That’s when Kwak says that’s what Accenture’s own data shows.

My impression of consulting giants like Accenture (McKinsey, Bain, Deloitte, KPMG...) has always been that they are very good at looking smart but in fact very bad at actually being smart. The idea that they’re spending serious money on AI tokens to turn PDFs and PowerPoint decks into Markdown only makes me think I’ve overestimated the median intelligence of the people who work there. I really thought Markdown couldn’t get more successful but this takes the cake. I love it that my little baby is helping burn these companies’ cash. This is so stupid it hurts to think about.

Markdown is something you start with because it’s easy to write and universally readable. You write Markdown and use that to make slides — like, say, with iA Presenter — not the other way around.

(Via Simon Willison.)

Simon Willison, with Cynthia Dunlop for her tech blogger interview series (from back in January, but he just got around to linking to it so I just got around to seeing it):

Any lessons learned that you want to share with the community?

My number one tip for blogging is to lower your standards! Aim to hit publish while you are still actively unhappy with what you have written, because the only alternative is a huge folder full of drafts and never publishing anything at all.

Nobody will ever know how perfect the thing you intended to write would have been. The flaws you see in your writing are invisible to everyone else.

This is excellent advice. Me, I try to get into the mindset of playing live music, not recording a studio album. Except when I’m writing a piece where I really want it to be an album. Those aren’t rare, per se, but they’re occasional. If I tried to make every post a hall-of-famer I’d never get anything out.

I’m aiming for professionalism. I’m performing live in front of an audience — not just jamming in my garage or bedroom, fucking around. So I’m careful and concentrate. I want to hit every note, in time. But at my best I’m moving from song to song.

But that leads to Dunlop’s next question for Willison:

Your advice for people just getting started with blogging?

Just start. It’s so easy to get caught in the trap of obsessing over the design of your blog, and planning for content that you never actually get around to writing. As long as each entry has a date on it and a permanent URL, it counts as a blog. I think adding an Atom or RSS feed is important too, but you can get started without one — don’t treat that as a blocker.

Don’t worry if nobody reads it. People are unlikely to stumble on your blog organically, but what matters is not the quantity but the quality of your readers. If the only person who reads your blog is a hiring manager that you send a link to, and that gets you an interview, your blog has already paid itself off many times over.

That’s the hard part about getting started, or at least it was for me. When you already have an audience it’s easier to take it seriously, to concentrate, to focus, to strive for perfection even though you will fall short. If you’re playing music in an empty room it’s harder to do that, to play the same way you would with an audience of dozens, hundreds, or thousands of people in front of you.

But just imagine they’re there. They will be if you keep it up. That’s one of my bits of advice to new bloggers: I firmly believe all blogs eventually get the audience they deserve, if they keep going. Write for the audience you want, not the audience you have.

Jeremy Hsu, Ars Technica:

Google briefly allowed anyone to create AI-modified versions of satellite imagery available in Google Earth — before quickly reversing its decision as people shared examples of AI-generated pictures that illustrated the potential for misinformation and disinformation.

Momentum!

A bunch of mine are stored here.

Simon Willison:

So that’s Anthropic, OpenAI, and Meta. Google Gemini really needs to catch up on accidentally cyberattacking other companies.

I’m surprised Willison hasn’t heard about how much momentum Gemini has.

Meta AI:

We’re excited to release Muse Code (beta), a terminal coding agent powered by Muse Spark 1.2, our newest model. This marks our next step toward the frontier, with larger and much more capable models on the way. [...]

Muse Code takes on complex software engineering tasks across large repositories: planning changes, writing code, and validating the results. It can coordinate multiple persistent subagents for each task, solving difficult problems faster, more accurately, and with less intervention.

Terminal-only (so far), so it avoids the whole native-app-versus-Electron-shit-sandwich debate. They’ve embedded some fun interactive examples of Spark’s output right in the web page.

Simon Willison:

An interesting twist on pricing is that the model is offered as two different model IDs. muse-spark-1.2 is priced at $1.25/million input and $4.25/million output — close to Gemini 3.6 Flash ($1.50/$7.50) — but if you agree to let Meta use your data “to improve our products” you can use muse-spark-1.2-contributor which is $0.10/$0.20 — a huge discount, closer to GPT-5.6 Luna ($0.20/$1.20) and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite ($0.25/$1.50).

That’s over a 10× discount in exchange for giving your data to Meta. I can see the appeal if you don’t care about the privacy of your data and code, like, say, if you’re using Muse Spark to generate code for a throwaway project, or for something that’s open source anyway. But I wonder if Meta has considered that this offer might spook would-be users who absolutely do not want to grant Meta the rights to their data. One would hope that the two systems have a strong firewall between them. But given Meta’s well-established contempt for the sanctity of user data, it’s not at all unreasonable to suspect that the difference here is like reserving a no-smoking seat in an airplane with a smoking section.

Joe Fabisevich, on Mastodon:

I submitted Plinky 6.0.4 for review last week. The macOS app was approved in 4 hours, the iOS app is still waiting for review. Sure do love to distribute software this way.

He’s not an outlier; I see comments like this from App Store developers everywhere I look.

(Plinky, by the way, is an intriguing link-bookmarking app that syncs across iOS and MacOS. It’s not for me, but the nature of my work is such that I have very unusual bookmarking needs. Plinky offers a bunch of convenient ways to stash new bookmarks with low friction. It’s a labor of love — it’s totally obvious that Fabisevich himself is the number one user of Plinky, and that’s almost always true of the very best apps.)

Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google DeepMind, the company’s artificial intelligence research lab:

We have arrived at a pivotal moment in human history. I’ve been working towards AGI my whole life and now, like many of you, I feel it is close at hand. It’s critical that we collectively get the next steps right to ensure this all goes well for humanity and we usher in an incredible new age of discovery and wonder.

With this backdrop, I’ve decided that now is the right time for me to hand over my day-to-day operational responsibilities at GDM, so that I have the time and space to focus on the big picture and help influence what is to come to the best of my ability. I will be taking on a new strategic role as Chair of GDM and Chief Scientist of Alphabet, and I’m excited to announce that Koray will be stepping up to lead GDM as SVP of Google DeepMind, in addition to his role as Chief AI Architect of Google.

Google published Hassabis’s letter alongside a letter from Sundar Pichai, and all of this is happening alongside four longtime Google leaders leaving to form a new AI-focused company. The headline of Google’s dual-memo announcement was “The Next Chapter of Our AI Momentum”, and Pichai uses the same word in 10 percent of his 30 sentences (emphasis added):

And you saw the incredible momentum at earnings across all our businesses, including Search, YouTube, and Cloud. […]

Google DeepMind: We are building strong momentum: Flash is in high demand, our Cyber model is live, and Gemma models have surpassed 900M+ downloads. […]

With today’s changes we’re going to keep driving our momentum. Onwards!

Methinks he doth protest too much. If Google really had the momentum in AI that Pichai is declaring, I suspect Gemini might have suggested he’s overusing the word.

Steven Levy, writing for Wired:

Today it’s official: After almost 27 years, Dean is leaving Google, along with Ghemawat and two other top-tier AI scientists, to found a company called Discovery Loop.

Even though Google will take a stake in the new company, it’s a devastating blow to the search giant as it attempts to keep pace in the frantic AI model competition. It’s bad enough that Dean and Ghemawat, who were among the company’s first hires, are leaving — that’s like Mick Jagger and Keith Richards ditching the Rolling Stones to start a new band. Worse, the other cofounders are also supernovas in the AI firmament: Oriol Vinyals, VP of research at DeepMind and a technical lead for Gemini, and Quoc Le, a cofounder of Google Brain and the key scientist behind Google’s AutoML-Zero, a project that uses machine learning algorithms to autonomously build AI products.

In an interview I did with the cofounders just before launch, Dean tells me the idea came up only a few weeks ago. He was quickly joined by the other three, who are not only long-time colleagues but friends who vacation together. “We were working on different things, but we were all starting to see the possibility of AI being able to automate scientific and engineering loops,” he says.

I think the Jagger/Richards analogy is strained, to say the least, but the tectonic plates have shifted this week over in Googleland. This might be to Google what io is to Apple — something that ought to have happened within rather than requiring departures of legendary talent.

[Update, Saturday 8 August: This story is retracted. Details forthcoming.]

Terry Godier, “Browsers Have Standards, the App Store Has Judgment”:

A while ago I tried to submit an iOS app for Dark Hours, my astronomy website for normal people. It was rejected on the grounds that it was astrology.

It has no tarot function, no horoscopes, and nothing that I, or anyone else I’ve asked, would associate with astrology.

I penned a nice little rant two years ago expressing my fury over the way that kooks promoting astrology often try to insinuate that their voodoo pseudoscience is even vaguely related to the hard science of astronomy. And it really is an unfortunate fluke of the English language that two subjects with a contentious relationship are differentiated as words by two letters. Even if you know the difference between the two, and care, if you’re reading quickly your eyes might conflate one word with the other.

But if you actually look at Godier’s Dark Hours, for even just a few seconds, it is instantly obvious that it pertains to the science of astronomy and has absolutely nothing — zero, zilch, nada — to do with astrology. So even if Apple’s App Store reviewer misread the submission’s description, and wrongly assumed it was yet another quack astrology app, if they launched it and spent just a few seconds poking around, they should have instantly recognized their incorrect assumption. But that’s not what happened. They rejected the app on the utterly incorrect grounds that it pertained to astrology. If this was an honest mistake from a reasonable judicial board, you’d expect the interaction with Godier, the developer, to have gone something like this:

App Review: REJECTED: Astrology.
Developer: No, it’s astroNoMy not astroLoGy.
App Review: Oh, sorry! Carry on, APPROVED.

But that’s not what happened at all. Godier proceeded through a series of escalations up to the App Review Board and the Review Board responded that they determined the original rejection was valid because, I shit you not, “We understand that the app includes a live tarot reading feature.” Which isn’t even about astrology. It’s straight out of Kafka.

Dark Hours is not just merely unrelated to astrology (let alone tarot-card reading). It’s actually exquisitely well-designed and painstakingly crafted. It’s exactly the sort of app that the App Store ought to celebrate and highlight. It doesn’t just belong in the category of astronomy apps in the App Store, it will raise the quality bar for astronomy apps in the App Store. iOS-exclusive, native Liquid Glass UI, smooth scrolling, beautiful typography and layout, and way more useful as a native mobile app than as a website. Go check out the website and I’m sure you’ll agree that it’s the sort of thing that would be even cooler as an app. But it is an app, and the app is better and more useful than the website version, and Godier has fought to get it approved. But Apple’s App Review Board said no, on fallacious easily-refuted grounds. This isn’t just contrary to the benefit of developers, like Godier. It’s obviously contrary to the benefit of Apple itself, which should not just accept an app like Dark Hours, but celebrate it as an exemplar of the platform.

Mistakes happen. But in a functioning system mistakes get corrected, and mistakes as obvious as this one get corrected almost instantly and include a quick apology for the conflation. The App Store is not a functioning system.

Meghan Bobrowsky and Erin Mulvaney, reporting for The Wall Street Journal (gift link):

A New Mexico judge ordered Meta Platforms to pay more than $900 million and limit the time young people in the state can spend on its apps, significantly increasing the cost of the landmark child safety verdict against the Facebook and Instagram parent.

The judge said Thursday that Meta must create a new $567 million abatement fund in addition to paying $375 million in civil penalties that a jury previously ordered. The company must also enact certain safety features such as limiting the amount of time underage users in the state spend on Facebook and Instagram, hiding by default the number of “likes” on photos for such people and disclosing to users there the risks of its platforms.

The creation of the fund, aimed at rectifying harms caused by the Facebook parent’s social-media apps, was “necessary, due to the wide-ranging impacts of the harm and the complex nature of the remedy,” state Judge Bryan Biedscheid said. The dollar-amount of the abatement fund was slightly smaller than the $779.5 million attorneys for the state sought.

Meta said it disagreed with the ruling and planned to appeal.

You don’t say.

The next trial, brought by four state attorneys general, begins jury selection in Oakland, Calif., next week. Meta said in a court filing that the states in that case are asking for more than $1 trillion in damages.

The case they just lost, with a judgment of about $1 billion, was for New Mexico alone. If this isn’t overturned, and then sets nationwide precedent, we’re talking real money. The tobacco companies survived, but this seems like that. Investors seem unconcerned — Meta’s stock is up 1.5% so far this morning.

Mark Gurman, reporting for Bloomberg (gift link):

OpenAI expects users to rely on the smart speaker throughout the day. It will work similarly to the company’s ChatGPT voice mode on smartphone apps, but with more advanced models for humanlike interactivity. The device is designed to learn more about a user over time, letting it tailor conversations and act more like a real person.

The circle-shaped device will include parts that move on their own, according to the people. That will help show when it’s responding and interacting with the user. The goal is to make the object feel more alive than today’s stationary speaker products. The product will have speaker grills and microphones for fielding commands and conversing with users. The battery-powered item will be designed to work in different positions — in a user’s hand, say, or placed on a nightstand or kitchen counter.

OpenAI is also planning to include lights on the device to demonstrate when it’s listening and make interactions feel more personal. A camera system and other sensors, meanwhile, will perceive the surrounding environment and feed visual information into the AI.

This doesn’t sound like a “smart speaker” with lights, moving parts, cameras, and other sensors. It sounds like a robot companion, and a robot companion obviously needs a speaker, amongst its other essential features. It’s like calling R2-D2 “a smart speaker” — it wouldn’t be wrong but it’s missing the point. (You could technically call the iPhone “a smart speaker”.) What the io device seems to be missing is autonomous movement. So you need to carry it around like a mogwai, rather than it following you around or going places on its own. I couldn’t give two shits about an OpenAI “smart speaker” if the point is just to play music and podcasts, but a handheld cross between R2-D2 and C-3PO, that could be fucking cool.

It’s a pet, it sounds like. A revolutionary pet, if they pull it off. And people love their pets.

This is more like it. No mealymouthing or wishy-washiness here. This is a strident defense. I’ll quote just one line for now:

Apple offers nothing because it has nothing because there is nothing. Its Complaint cannot and does not state a misappropriation claim against Defendant Tan.

I’ll post more thoughts later, but if you’re following this lawsuit, you should read OpenAI’s motion yourself. It’s cogently written, not mired in legalese. Legalese is generally a sign of shitty lawyers. The law is meant to be practiced by lawyers, but understood by everyone. The law is not a priesthood; motions in a lawsuit are not holy texts reserved for the sainted few. What boggles my mind is that almost none of the outlets reporting on this today linked to OpenAI’s actual motion. (Kudos to Jess Weatherbed of The Verge, who did.) Summaries are necessary and commentary is good, but for chrissake link to the source document.

This comic from Brendan Leonard is a fine companion to yesterday’s items (here and here) on pausing to consider if our use of AI is helping us focus our time on what we love to do, or, instead, robbing us of the things that make us human. The bit about making a sandwich hit close enough to home for me to make me laugh aloud.

Regarding my earlier complaint about it being a slog to open Safari’s preferences in the Settings app on iOS, a few readers pointed me to this tweet last year from Quinn Nelson, showing how to build (or download from iCloud) a simple Shortcuts shortcut that you can add to Control Center to open the current app’s preferences in Settings. Works great.

Update: Stephen Robles:

I made a few riffs off that one as well:

• Jump to current app notification settings
• Current app storage
• Open current app in App Store