skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Europe Worries as Facebook Fights Manipulation Worldwide
The developed world went through its industrial and agricultural revolutions over 100 years ago, and land use hasn't changed dramatically since then. Developing countries aren't doing anything different; they're just doing it now. Particular examples of this are Brazilian deforestation and Chinese pollution.

Given what we now know about the global impact of these activities, it makes sense that the world pushes back against their development plans. Part of it is "don't make the same mistakes we did," but most of it is "there's a better way," and part of it is a realization that the world collectively needs less pollution and more trees, and since we've already chopped down our trees, we want Brazil to keep theirs for our (global) benefit.

That latter point is selfish. Yes, it's good for the world as a whole, but the cost to Brazil is foregoing the benefits of exploiting their resources the same way other industrialized nations already have. The same applies to China and pollution. They're doing the same thing the US did for much of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The selfish part is denying these countries the right to exploit their land the way that we already have. If the rest of the world wants Brazil to stop chopping down forests, they should pay them for it.
Architect of China’s ‘Great Firewall’ Bumps Into It

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/world/asia/china-internet...
> Or... your privilege allows you to ignore the political consequences of most conversations.

What political consequences are there to most conversations?
I'm not sure trying to figure out the "correct" percentage to cover Apple's costs really makes sense.

All those factors you mention are probably better measured as a flat fee per user rather than a percentage of the sale cost. Free apps cost Apple just as much to host and support as paid apps, so why don't they get charged?

The 30% is essentially arbitrary. They're making a healthy profit from the App Store, so 30% must be on the high side. And the amount different apps are paying must vary a huge amount, only loosely correlated with their hosting costs.
Nordstrom also does polymorphic React with server-side rendering via .NET [0]. I've always been impressed with this part of their stack.

[0] https://libraries.io/github/Nordstrom/React.NET
It’s employed as a distraction or means to vent rage at a palatable target. The Danes, the Jews, Israel, Americans, that serves a dual purpose. “Oh you want more freeeom of speech? See what they do with it in Denmark! You want a democracy... like America? Like Israel?” China is a valuable trading partner and a government in the same model as the autocracies of the Middle East, so they shut up about that. There’s always been profit in turning domestic rage against Israel in general, and Jews in particular. It’s been a way of life for the house of Saud for example, even as they quietly make deals with Israel and bomb their fellow Muslims in Yemen.

Mind you, that’s the governments, out of over a billion Muslims worldwide no doubt many individuals are outraged over China’s treatment of their co-religionists, but they don’t have an effective platform. They also have to be careful depending on where they live about whether or not to even try to voice it.
It's basically Domain Driven Design combined with SOLID principals. If you have a Customer domain and an Order domain, as tempting as it is to join the two related tables in code, avoid it. Have another service (not http service/domain service) aggregate information from both domains.

It's then mechanically trivial to split the Customer module and the Orders module both the code and the data store.
Really? The world would be the same if Microsoft never existed or better off?

No doubt IBM would have led innovation if not kneecapped by M$.
Good point, but for a Startup I think even that is too low level. I would suggest something like Istio or Lagom (which is built on top of Akka).
Evaluating Vax Lisp 3.1
Apple also has a large and growing editorial staff writing articles and highlights for their App Store; it's virtually becoming a house magazine. So being in their store potentially offers exposure and marketing for free that's immensely valuable. (Whether it's 30% valuable is debatable, of course. Personally I think they should drop it from 15%/30% to 10%/20%, but "Apple: always more expensive than you think they should be" has worked for them for a long time.)
We did. And that’s why we do.
It's a result from queueing theory. Think of the queue of incoming work (such as immigrants to be processed) as the amount of work each takes on average plus some statistic representing a really large amount of time that most jobs will not require, but some will.

First off, to prevent long waits, you need enough capacity to do the work at the average rate at which it comes in. If your bank gets an average of 20 customers an hour, you need to be able to process 20 customers per hour, or queues will not only form but grow steadily longer.

But, even if you have a single worker doing work at exactly the average incoming rate, any outlier jobs that take more than the average amount of work (one unfortunate customer that takes the time of four ordinary ones) will cause the formation of a queue, because the only available worker is occupied. And any queues that do form will be permanent, because incoming jobs fill the queue just as quickly as your worker clears it. These queues have no good reason to exist -- you're doing the work just as fast as it arrives -- but they can't clear. A second worker will solve this problem almost entirely (on the assumption that outliers are rare) -- the expected queueing time from a single worker who is expected to process 10 customers an hour is vastly larger than the expected queueing time from two workers who are expected to process 5 customers an hour each. The improvement comes from the fact that while an outlier is jamming one worker, the queue behind that outlier can still be cleared by the other worker.

Airport immigration doesn't work this way; they have short periods in which hundreds of people arrive simultaneously and long periods in which nobody arrives at all. So they provide some amount of staff and expect them to gradually clear the queues that form instantly whenever an airplane lands. They don't expect the entire airplane to be cleared simultaneously even though everyone on it arrived simultaneously. In this case, the queue time is just a function of how much work there is to do, and how much staff is available to do it, and your two-hour queue time is a problem of low staffing levels, not poor queue design.
TDD usually means tests-first development. It’s possible to have tests-required without TDD or tests-first.
The one place where CFA IT seems to fall down is at the drive-through.

I used to be able to pay for my order with the order taker on his/her iPad using my Apple Watch.

For the last six months or so, I have to go all the way to the pick-up window, and they have to get a manager to unplug a card swipe terminal from the front counter, plug it in near the window, log in to the terminal, and then hang the actual terminal out of the window so I can tap my watch.

Very strange. Hopefully it's only a problem at the one CFA in my geographic area.
Observability Signals
Breaking Badge: A story of the DEF CON 26 badge competition
"latechi?" ive always heard it "lah-tek"
> Is there a SaaS opportunity here?
No, because it's (obviously) forbidden.
like that’s a good experience
The parent's point is that could be handled at the store level. With IAP, you have to decide to split your game and write a bunch of code to do A or do B. Apple could put a time (absolute or use) lock on a game and have it just not open after unless the user buys it. The game is exactly the same during the demo period and after purchase.
AMD has no such problems.
>Why would they care, you don't have a choice.

I wouldn't have complain if it was from any other companies. But it is Apple, they need to be better. Why do they need to do it? Steve gave an answer long ago, "Because we give a Damn!"
> The claims of the PRC And the points of that resolution are basically the same. It’s not explicitly saying the PRC is right, it doesn’t have to do that, it’s just saying the exact same thing that the PRC has been saying. Which is normal English means “the UN has accepted the position of the PRC.”

The fact is that the UN has not passed any resolution recognizing the claims of the PRC to Taiwan. There is no implicit recognition. Here's a thought experiment: If the PRC introduced such a resolution, do you know what would certainly happen? The US (at the very least) would veto it, since the US itself has never accepted the claims of the PRC to Taiwan (in fact, if anything the US has committed to defend Taiwan from the PRC). The only rational conclusion is that the PRC has never tried to pass such a resolution because it knows it would lose. You're idea that this supports implicit acceptance of such a resolution is totally ridiculous.

Regardless I hope you would at least have the self-respect and honesty to acknowledge that the UN never has accepted the claims of the PRC to Taiwan.
> in which case there aren't too many references until the subprocesses get to work.

In my workload that's exactly when it hits.

We ran into this when sharing different parts of a huge matrix with different workers. We had to be extra careful that we did not create new references in the subprocesses. We were operating at scale where if we got it wrong OOM will kill us.

Working with memory mapped arrays are more forgiving.
Best and worst ending to a game ever. I still remember the music...
The first assembly program I wrote and got paid a handsome sum for:

jmp FFF0

The client was amazed that I'd figured out a way to automate the ctrl-alt-del monkeys that had been hired to reboot everyones machines, for some reason, every night ..
> But they're not near-equivalent.

> Group vs individual.

If the organizational operation isn't transparent, it's observably the same top-down dictatorship (worrying about one versus many is silly, insofar as no human governs alone).
Maybe not, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.
I'm not pleading for exceptions to human rights, I'm saying human rights is a concept that has to be abandoned because they are nothing more than a tool from the west to impose their will all around the world. That's why they are selectively applied: nobody bats an eye about Israel or Saudi Arabia or China[1], but Syria couldn't defend themselves, so bombs away.

[1] China are not friends of the US, that's why they are criticised by the "media", but nobody has the balls to bomb the place, and I'm the sure the US would love to!
Not sure, could have been as mundane as me using one of the staff laptops to login to Google - a no-no in retrospect.

Yep, a warning similar to this one, but in Gmail: https://news-cdn.softpedia.com/images/news2/Google-Extends-S...
This is a great idea, exactly what I was trying to get at in my comment elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17821945
No they don't. There are a few exceptions, but the vast majority of assets are managed but asset managers who have mandates to stay fully invested. Only niche hedgefunds time markets.
Wouldn't numerous apes that operate in groups that seem like simple societies, some of which have been seen passing down traditions like very simple tool use, make the list?
I read that Apple recently (June) added this to their rules: "Multiplatform Services: Apps that operate across multiple platforms may allow users to access content, subscriptions, or features they have acquired elsewhere, provided those items are also available as in-app purchases within the app. You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase."

Now you don't even have the choice not to sell your subscription products on iOS...
Being charitable to the speaker isn't beneficial when a very large contingent of readers were coming away with the wrong impression. Hence why they changed the wording.

It remains that the official statement from the company has incredibly misleading wording, so it seems suspect to attack people who might "misinterpret" that, though. Uncharitable, even.
When I entered on the 12th, ten days ago, there were no freestanding fingerprinting machines. (Actually, there was one, but it wasn't in use.) Instead, the immigration booth itself took your fingerprints using a much smaller machine. This is, obviously, a logistical disaster, and I'm stupefied that they were using a better system and threw it out.
We eat meat because it brings us pleasure. Nutrionally we can live without it [0].

So here are our options:

1) Eat real meat and derive pleasure from it, but at the cost of having to make animals suffer, having to kill them and getting food that's quite energy intensive and destructive to the environment and destructive to the people having to work in that industry (factory farming)

2) Hunt and kill animals yourself or raise and kill them yourself - ensuring they (hopefully) had a good life (but still questionable from an ethics point of view whether it's right to kill an animal when you don't need to, to survive).

3) Eat fake meat that's close to the real thing, but no animals have to suffer or die. In the future it will be as good or better than the real thing [1]

4) Explore so many meat free recipes that can equally bring us pleasure and slowly change our habits and tastebuds that are better for the planet.

Option 2 is better than option 1 - but most people couldn't do it and also with option 2 we couldn't feed the world - so to me the future is based on option 3 and 4, i.e. plant based.

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27886704

[1] When fake super meat is better than the real thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TpQl9V9yoA

Edit: typo
Calculates the best tennis strings for the user based on their playing style
" and farm animals like cows and chicken. "

Population growth is not equivalent to symbiosis...
Show HN: Crypto Table – A Periodic Table of Cryptocurrencies
Yeah, I wish the article had more detail on the data and how they want to use it instead of the same overview of containerization you could find a thousand other places.
I'm not following your logic. Even if the planet is in a worse state than it was, despite the increase in forest cover, it doesn't follow that we would be better off having done nothing.
If your idea in the example is that the second "debit" is created by another transaction while your transaction is in progress, then this will not work out. Firstly it requires a dirty read, which is nothing I would rely on in a transaction. Secondly, if the dirty read works, assuming the outcome of several rows is just a read operation, which forces you to rollback on the client and still leaves a window for inconsistencies if you decide to commit. Maybe SELECT .. FOR UPDATE can do a trick here, but that is like giving up life.

To round this up: RDBMS are bad for queue like read semantics. All you can do is polling. Which is even worse if you end up being lock heavy.
> If our greatest environmental efforts can at best end in failure, then those efforts are wasted and we're better off taking no action.

??? "I'm going to die someday, so I might as well subsist on nothing but sugar and alcohol 'til then?"

Anyway, characterizing our efforts as "greatest" is far too generous. They were the efforts we gave. Not the greatest possible efforts that could be given. If biodiversity were the priority, we would have solved this problem.
No. This doesn't follow. It's like saying that if cancer treatment only extends your life by 5-10 years, it had no value.

We are in a worse state not because of the additional trees, but because of other behaviors. There was never a promise that planting trees would make carbon emissions irrelevant (or plastic in the oceans or...)
We did (to an extent) which is why we implemented the environmental laws we now have. But living so long without the severe negative environmental impacts leads us to slacken our resolve, because it's easy to think we got to this point for free.
The app developer would rather do that in the app, they could get a better conversion rate.
“Ideas are cheap, execution is everything” – prove it for $1
I worry about GDPR with respect to Kafka and other append-only databases.
I noticed this the other day, I had seen on my desktop that YouTube was £11.99 per month. When I was out, i had forgotten to sync my songs but I wanted music for the day so I went to try YouTube Premium.

£15.99 per month. I could have sworn it was £11.99.....

I deleted my YouTube app, and signed up for £11.99. Reinstalled my YouTube app and it was Premium.

I am being told to "get the app as it is better" and yet evidence suggests that having the app cost me £48 a year in this situation.

That is ridiculous surely?
CFA has long meant control flow analysis in PL.
The Relational Model for Database Management [pdf]
I think inverting the power structure between maintainers and contributors is good for openness. The tradeoff here is it makes the project harder to govern and maintain, which an have its own unintended consequences.
Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? (2000)
Nothing is preventing businesses from taking trash to the dump for a buck, except unprofitability. All profit is derived from economic friction. Regulations are simply friction, in economic terms. This ideological push for friction-free, perfect competition markets that infects our political/economic thought is anti-capitalist, anti-business, and fundamentally absurd. In perfect competition, all profit margins are driven to zero. The only source of profit is barrier to entry. Read Peter Thiel. He talks about this extensively in Zero to One, and he's not some treehugging commie.

In this light, regulation isn't an impediment to business - it's an opportunity. By making the task more difficult, we make it more profitable.

Now, I'm sure you're anxious about some sort of corruption where businesses collude with government to lock out competition. So, tell me... what is a contract? Is it anything other than a regulatory mechanism to exclude competition?

Suppose you start the BuckABucket Trash Company, and charge a buck. I hire you because you're cheap. Then you come back next week and find out I've ditched you for GayNinety Trash Company, who charges 90 cents. Sucks, right? Makes it very hard to commit capital to the business! You just bought a truck and everything. The way you prevent this behavior is by locking me into a contract - you'll take out my trash for a buck, but you get to do it for the next year. Everyone wins. I get cheap reliable trash service, you get a steady customer.

Except now we've just regulated away your competition. Funny, that.

Really, put down the right wing ideology feed about economics and think about how it actually works.
The license doesn't just talk about the software - it tries to restrict the sale of knowledge about it (in the form of consulting) too.

That makes it the most overreaching of any software license I have ever encountered, including those from Oracle.
Here's a possible way around this clause:
An AWS-like hosting service prepares images of every clause-bound instance users might want (e.g. Linux + Redis + Redis Add-ons), and provides them completely free for download. They also rent users a virtual machine and the ability to quickly load one of these free images.
Apple Pay and app store/itunes payments are completely separate. I had apple pay set-up for awhile and when I went to purchase an app, itunes wouldn't accept apple pay and I had to re-enter all my CC information into itunes.
> Microservices from a startup perspective: don't.

Like staticassertion already mentioned, it depends on the real project and problem to solve.

I've pitched a startup which started directly with an microservice like architecture. It was the best possible approach for the given problem.
Once again, define 'politics'.
Yeah, too many microservices I've seen are easily replaced by a function, and the practical tradeoffs are entirely benefits.
I think that once you get enough of an outside view of any given society, we see the seams fall apart all over the place. Social norms are extremely inconsistent.
This will be helpful if it comes to practical use, particularly for traumas.

But we will still need to test for compatibility.

There are something like 28 different blood groups: Duffy, Kidd, Kell, etc.

People who have antibodies to those other blood groups can have a reaction even if given O negative blood.

(Source: I am board certified in Transfusion Medicine)
If that was your primary point then maybe I misunderstood.

I otherwise wholeheartedly agree in the need for compassion, even in spite of eating meat. Thankfully for that reason I don't have as my only option meat farmed from the US, and I'm able to buy meat that is Canadian and can be sourced. I'm probably lucky in that I grew up not knowing a single farmer who would be okay with the kinds of processes you're speaking about.

Some cruel farms exist here, you can find news of them pretty easily—but it's thankfully not the norm—and typically those aren't even cases of factory farms, just sick people.
1-in-2 JavaScript project audits by NPM tools sniff out at least 1 vulnerability
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

Somehow I missed the couple paragraphs mentioning kitchen equipment, and only saw the "Why does a restaurant company like Chick-fil-A want to deploy Kubernetes at the Edge?" bits. Those don't really give me any idea of what they're doing with the servers.

Thank you for the rude comment that doesn't even answer my question, though.
How can you argue that it's not worth "anywhere near 10%, let alone 30%" if there are so many firms willing to pay it? The idea of the fees is not to cover the costs of doing business, it's to turn a (ideally significant) profit.

It sounds like your expectation is that a company would not charge as much as the market will accept for a unique product. How much it costs to simply handle e.g. payment processing has relatively little to do with it.