skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Predicting what is next is hard.
Turning what is next to be successful is even harder.
China may be able to push into AI and microprocessors, but it will need to have the culture of trial and honest admission of failure if it is to actually deliver on the next big thing. I think it is still unclear (despite the great results they have with 5G) that China knows how to do that.
I didn't know about that chapter, will definitely check it out now!
Technology us creating criminal justice reform
We kind of used to... dreamweaver, when it was still macromedia, was pretty neat.
> Keep in mind, the 1st gen iPad was single core and only had 256MB of RAM

We ran immersive 3D games on less than that. There is no good reason some fucking website should be dogshit slow.
This is an excellent explanation.
Great question. It's not that cut and dried. You could probably ask ten Americans what either the balance of power between the federal government is, OR what it should be, and get ten different answers.

The reality is that, today, the federal government gets the lion's share of attention but the bulk of day-to-day stuff (roads, schools, police, utilities eg water) are run by state and local governments. BUT--and this is an important caveat--SOME (not a lot, but some) money for this is provided by the federal government through about 20 different mechanisms including federal block grants for education, federal highway funding, and other mechanisms.

It's actually quite complicated, but to a first approximation, most local things are operated locally, financed mostly locally, but the federal government does kick in (fund) a little on certain things, in a way that's fairly haphazard and subject to the whims of politics, than any sort of tradition-driven or constitutional way.

Incidentally, this is part of why the US's COVID response has been literally "all over the map". It's mostly in the hands of the states and you're seeing how 50 different political cultures deal with this crisis.
I think you are vastly overstating the importance of apps.

Apple could easily remove the App Store tomorrow, sign deals with a dozen or so companies e.g. Facebook, Netflix, Twitter, Snap, Google, Microsoft etc and they would still sell devices.
I’m looking forward to Apple having to argue in front of a legislative body why streaming services are given a different treatment than any other software.
Lol this is good
Those are all very different propositions where the company brings some value - the theatre itself, the player software, the content/catalog. A good illustration of how bankrupt the Apple Walled Garden is - just a fence to extract money with zero added value.
Not really the stance I'm taking.

If your product has such a high overhead that the listed price for that product is so high that if you add the 30% back in no one would buy then you're probably doing a poor job of pricing your product, or your overhead is too high.

Basecamp makes money hand over fist. DHH has some of the most expensive sports cars in the world.

I would hazard a guess that even at $100/yr, Hey costs less than 50% of that to actually run. Similar email services cost around $50/yr give or take $10, and they're making profit at that cost.

I don't particularly want to line DHH's pockets even more. Now, admittedly Basecamp pays their employees pretty well so that's a consideration, too. I'm all for the normal employees getting paid well, but I don't think someone like DHH should be making money like he is. Every time I see him bitching about this topic on Twitter I immediately think "oh, he's going to buy himself another one off Koenigsegg from the profits of this"

Na. DHH gets no love from me. I'd feel more sorry for the smaller developers, but DHH, nope, not gonna be on his side ever.
It seems any company becomes evil when it gets large enough.
Apple should just offer Hey the option of providing the Hey app without the 30% cut, but negotiate how much Hey wants to pay for use of Apple's SDKs.
I agree 100%, and it all depends on what problem you're solving for. For the 80% case of having an API which just serves one or a few of your own clients with their UIs architected into broadly similar views, I basically just go for an additive model of providing a default RESTful API but then additional view-specific, and then if necessary even client-specific, endpoints on top where this makes sense.

Honestly most of the time you can even just cut out the REST layer except where it overlaps with views by coincidence. For instance in practice there are quite a lot of views which simply get a single resource, or list a single type of resource with paging.

For mutations I am a big fan of just doing it RPC-style. I know it's not to everyone's taste but I feel like abstracting mutations out behind a model of RESTful resources and verbs is, 99% of the time, a waste of time, the notable edge case being where you truly need a flexible API for 3rd parties (both apps with UIs and scripts) where organising functionality in this completely generic flexible way - with the considerable extra effort that you mention being the price to pay - has huge payoff.
Didn't apple pull something similar with Spotify, that tried to direct users to their page for subscription and Apple warned/suspended them for doing so?

Edit: Confirmed.

>Spotify’s complaint against Apple is a good example(1)(2)(3). Apple charges Spotify a 30% fee to use the App Store(4) and limits how it can communicate with its users. Apple is the owner of the iOS platform and the App Store and is a direct competitor of Spotify(5).

source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2019-00299...
Yes, he was a warring bloodthirsty emperor that used the popular religion at the time to consolidate his power. Like most other empires on the planet two thousand years ago. I’m not sure what that is supposed to prove about Buddhism in particular.
> I think we're stuck with expensive repeated query planning.

I agree with that (sadly). I'd like to see more expressive SQL, but I'm not saying it will make the situation with planning any better. I'd argue it should not make it much worse either, if done right.
Do they also ban apps that show public transport schedules, because you can't buy tickets through them?
If someone were to look at the reviews on the App Store, they would realize that users are extremely happy with the Hey app, despite how Apple attempts to portray the situation.
> in typical "mathematician minimalist style" it squeezed everything into one enormous, terse, but useless blob

You're complaining that it's both too minimalist and too enormous?
Bobbby Valentino-Gangsta Love (With Lyrics)
Once, phone makers thought that apps were a benefit to their phone, not a cost.
No offence taken, we are all students :) Monopolies (and duopolies, where there is collusion) can be bad for society, which is why we have specific exceptions in law to deal with them. Apple doesn’t hold a monopoly position in the smartphone market. In fact, they don’t even hold a majority position in the smartphone market. This is like going after Dr Pepper with antitrust...it’s never going to happen.
You mean the locked down apis that are not available to the puclic? Those can rot in hell.
> Apple have (freely) provided Basecamp a platform to grow their business via the App Store, whilst giving Apple (effectively) nothing in return.

It's not free though, is it? You have to pay $99 a year, and purchase Apple hardware to develop and test software for their platforms. Basecamp, who hire 50+ people most likely all run Apple hardware, so that's tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars to Apple over the years.
> edited with a fake chyron

Not only fake, but fake-looking. They even misspelt “toddler”. Worrying times, when it’s hard to tell if the original (fake) video was made as a joke or was trying to pass itself off as real. These days it’s not hard to believe some people will take it as being true, and a lot of damage will have been done by the time the obvious flaws are pointed out.
The "red terror" certainly used to be the case few decades ago, but todays it's the USA that has the worlds largest percentage of population locked away in prisons and doing forced labor, not China.
Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. I consider Mullvad to be both, a technologically superior product, and a much more trustworthy company than ProtonVPN.
Thanks! We have some network features in the pipeline (including better viz) and will be introducing some stdlib functions to help in the coming days. :)

We have some users representing networks in the 3D viewer at present, and have seen three ways implementing networks to date:

1. Edges are represented as agents. They are used to store properties such as edge length, and to provide nodes with a way of accessing other nodes.

2. Edges are represented AND USED as agents. Edges not only store properties but themselves exhibit behaviors.

3. Nodes are given a network object which contains information about their network neighbors and all relevant properties (such as directed/undirected edge, edge length, etc...)

Re: your question around experiments... yes to all three (parameter sweeping, Monte Carlo, and sensitivity analysis), and a bunch more. We'll be shipping this alongside H-Cloud. More on that in the full explainer at https://hash.ai/about/mission

Thanks for giving the beta a spin! Happy to chat in more depth over on our public Slack.
We do live in a time of mandated . This seems like a way to make sure the correct opinion is formed immediately, without having to apply thinking.
I started as a clerk, then became a DJ (detroit techno, yeah!), then I was selling custom software in a software house, then I became an account manager for a couple system integrators (ICT), then a manager of a data center department (sales too), then a global account manager working for a giant tech vendor (networking) where I was dealing with the biggest accounts and massive deals, and now I'm a software engineer (web dev) and an entrepreneur (I've had 3 other companies in the past, too, with 2 of them bankrupt). 2 next companies planned, but I don't have time to startup them! Ugh, meanwhile I learned 2 foreign languages, become a psychotherapist (a good one!), read over 1000 books, became proficient in trading stocks, and God knows what else... I don't even remember. Ough, I converted from an atheist to a more spiritually aware person due to my journey thru philosophy and metaphysics ;)

I'm 34. I started working when I was 19. I don't have what you people call a degree. Instead I've put all the money that I was about to put into a "degree" to fulfill my home library with a lot of good books. Now I have 1k+ of them. Best investment ever!

What do you think, that I'm some kind of genius? WTF, I'm just a regular dude who's incredibly bored with BS the world has been trying to sell me on every corner. I do what I want to do and what makes sense. Period.

Coming back to the topic:

1) You sit on your ass and you start. If you don't have a clear vision why you are doing a given thing (especially long, complex projects), no wonder that you don't know how to start. Try to visualize the positive outcomes from the enterprises you want to dive into. Make a mission statement. Then make a plan. At least a hypothesis and test it. Doesn't work? Click next and prepare another one. Repeat, until it's going to work. Keep track of your attempts.

2) The same as (1). If you haven't internalize why you're doing a given thing, you won't stick with it.

3) You don't "pivot". You just do stuff you consider to be worth doing. The method is the same as in (1). First a plan / hypothesis, then fire and eventually you are going to get there. Isn't that logical?

There's no need to be scared, dude. The whole universe is trying to help you. No one knows anything! We can only test what we think might be a good shot. I'm not sure if you realize how much one can accomplish in 10 years. You basically can completely change your life... Twice. People tend to overestimate what they can do in a year and underestimate long periods of time like 10y.

The rest is just details.

I wish you luck!
I absolutely despise Apple and will never own an iPhone but what they did here is perfectly reasonable. Apple doesn't force users to use in-app purchases. It only forces developers (not users) to provide the option of purchasing access to services directly within the app. This isn't eliminating any choices for users and Apple isn't inserting itself between completely unrelated businesses to extend their reach beyond the Apple ecosystem.
I have no problem with Apple offering the services they do in their app store for developers who'd like to use it.

The issue is that it's not really an honest choice - This company has decided that they'd rather not use it, and they have effectively lost access to the platform entirely.

Basically - What you're saying is that Apple should have the legal monopoly over building channels to market for iOS (because they prohibit any other form of distribution). I don't believe that should be true. I'd actually say that's exactly what put Microsoft into a world of pain for IE, and they were actually much more open about it - a user was free to install a different browser on Windows, a user is not free to install a different app store on iOS.
I'm a NodeJS fanboy and I partially agree with this.

Feel free to use NodeJS if it allows you iterate faster and your app doesn't need much load.

If you're planning to serve a lot of ConcurrentUser with high RequestPerSecond I suggest to carefully plan the execution.

I'm having trouble now. One of the projects I'm working on is using NodeJS acting as React SSR server (I know it's heavy). It crashes under pressure, with 10-ish CCU reaching only 12-RPS before crashing. The NodeJS server is not clustered yet though. If it is clustered, it might reach a bigger number, but I doubt it would be that significant. Scale up to 1000 users using Kubernetes and see yourself how big the compute bill next month.

This is a fault in architecture and I'm telling you not to repeat my mistake. There are enhancements to NodeJS. NAPI is one, WASM is being introduced too, which is good news. You can utilize child_process and hire someone to write some fast binary for computation-heavy applications and execute that binary.

Again, a lot of companies succeed with NodeJS. It's not to be completely avoided. Just be careful not to use it for something it is not used for.
Wish there wasn't a stupid invite list so I can use it now instead of waiting :/
And that’s what Spotify did when they allowed in app purchases. They charged more for going through the App Store. Do physical retailers go out of their way to say that you can get a product cheaper somewhere else? Can manufacturers advertise in Walmart that consumers can get the item cheaper if they go to Amazon?
puts on additional layer of tinfoil hat

Of course the Soviets were in on it. They didn't publicly humiliate the US because they feared Mad Man Nixon would start WW3 over it. IT ALL MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
Yeah, Apple keeps pushing this narrative that they are giving away a free service to developers that don't accept payments. It costs $99 a year to put anything on the App Store.

And if Apple is really that concerned about free distribution, I'm sure they could set up an AWS-like pricing model where there's a set price for data transfer, updates, maybe even push notifications.
You understand that this would kill free apps, and strongly disincentivize many startups and other small shops from developing for the app store? This, in turn, would devalue the entire iOS ecosystem and likely hurt Apple's revenue.
Again, they don't provide the channel, once the app is installed. Not the device; not the network; not the content. They just extract money with rules.
>I'm probably missing something, but can't Hey just make subscriptions in their page and let the App from free in the App Store?

That is exactly what they are doing at the moment. Apple has decided to invent a new requirement that this approach is only valid for business applications, and consumer client apps must offer in-app signup and purchase.

I'm generally pro-Apple on these issues. It's their store running on their products on their infrastructure. However in this case I don't believe Hey is violating the current stated and published app store rules. Apple's decision in this case seems capricious and arbitrary, and more than a little hypocritical.
> 2 monopolies

Uh...

Also, monopoly has a very specific definition. It does not mean "company with large marketshare".
You can do this.. but you cannot say "we charge you 30% more here, but if you signup over there, it's regular price"

Apple saying "it's giving the users more options" is total BS.. it's all about getting their 30%, because if you play by their rules, and give the customer more knowledge that you're being forced to charge extra because of this payment option.. then Oh noes.

A great example outside the app store is some credit cards charge much more than the others, so some stores charge you that on top. "You want to use X card, sorry but there's a surcharge for that card.. you could use something else.
Yes, list more abuse as a reason to justify this particular abuse.
But this case is not relevant, because Apple faces robust and significant competition from Android smartphones (though I would argue perhaps not in wearables).
actually you can't use an enterprise license for the app store.
https://developer.apple.com/programs/enterprise/
it clearly says that:

> Please learn about the Apple Developer Program first. The Apple Developer Program is the right option for most organizations that want to distribute proprietary, internal-use apps. It allows you to use Apple Business Manager, Ad Hoc distribution, or redemption codes to privately distribute custom apps to employees, and TestFlight to test beta versions of your apps.

> The Apple Developer Enterprise Program is only for specific use cases that cannot be addressed using these methods. Before applying for the Apple Developer Enterprise Program, learn more about the Apple Developer Program to see if it addresses your use case. If not, you can start your application.

so it's only 99 USD
At Apple's expense? Does it work on Windows without paying MS a penny at Microsoft's expense?
I'm pretty sure that Apple doesn't host basecamp...
The enterprise account is for people deploying enterprise apps internally. You can't use it for publishing apps to the App Store. Basecamp will be using the standard developer account, not the enterprise account.
I saw "Imbox" and thought, I will never use this product.
The parent complains that apps on phones are mostly useless Barcode Scanners and scam QR readers.

Apple could easily do away with third party apps and sign licensing deals with third parties, and they’d still be massively popular. Most people download the same apps, and then there is an enormous long tail with barely any downloads at all.
>Apple have (freely) provided Basecamp a platform to grow their business via the App Store, whilst giving Apple (effectively) nothing in return.

App Store has never been free for developers.
There's no alternative: all belief systems must have some axioms that people agree on "just because", as if the axioms required justification, then the system used for justifying them would also need to be justified, ad infinitum. It's a bit like Gödel's second incompleteness theorem: a moral system cannot prove itself to be moral.

What we can do is try to understand and compare the axiomatic systems upon which belief systems rest. Marxists believe in the labour theory of value (very roughly, "value" comes from time spent working). Austrians believe "value" is a form of ordinal utility with which intrapersonal utility comparisons cannot be made. Mainstream economics believes "value" is a form of cardinal utility with which intrapersonal comparisons can be made.

Within the context of one of those systems, if somebody argues for something that doesn't maximise what the system values, we could say it's unscientific. If somebody makes an inconsistent statement, we could argue it's illogical. But if somebody makes a statement that is consistent with maximising value as defined by that system, we cannot argue it's unscientific just because it doesn't maximise value as defined by our own system, because science cannot say whether our own system is morally superior.
I think this might be a morning person / evening person thing. I for example find it much easier to do deep work later in the day.
I think if you think back to 2007/8 and people had the choice of Android with millions of apps and a higher priced iOS ecosystem which only has some high profile apps so few people would choose iOS that it would quickly become a waste of money for FB/Twitter/MS to build their apps for it and it would die.
Read the article and Guideline 3.1.3(a). The rules aren't unwritten. Stop making things up.
That's really a nonsensical example. An app not having a feature to pay for something is very different from an app requiring to buy something elsewhere.
> Apple have (freely) provided Basecamp a platform to grow their business via the App Store, whilst giving Apple (effectively) nothing in return.

I've purchased an expensive phone mainly so that I can have access to a high quality ecosystem of apps. Apps like Basecamp and Hey are part of that for me. Apple gains so much from the breadth of high quality apps on the app store, including free apps. If they begin to see free apps as giving them effectively nothing, I see that as an indication that they no longer value the reasons I go to them as an iOS user.
Get ready for the International Yoga Day 2020
There is also the missing other side to this argument, and that's without third part apps Apple couldn't sell it's phones that it surely makes a decent amount of money on. Without third-party app authors Apple couldn't sell it's phones. Perhaps Apple should be paying them?
The ego is going to kill future growth of the company. Investors, beware.
تنزيل انستقرام لايت 2020 Instagram Lite مجانا اخر اصدار
Analysis of SwissCovid app
An enterprise account is not required to ship public apps. It's specifically designed for those who want to ship private apps, which I'm pretty sure Basecamp don't do.
It sounded more like return/warranty protection - this merchant isn't honoring my return/warranty vs extended warranty protection which is slightly different.
From what I've read, US war department and other associated military/intelligence factions pumped billions into SV. Good times.
We discussed this at work. It's smug in a way that I can't articulate. Our first thought was that it was a typo, then we found the actual part of their website that tells us "no, it's not a typo". Thanks for that guys, I appreciate you changing my expectation to meet your contrived brand of UX design.

edit: typo :D
Facebook, Google, Twitter etc all offer advertising products targeted at app installs.

So if you imagine a fictitious world where anyone could just install apps off the web then you would need to buy ads through the main 3 players above to get any visibility. Just like how it works today for SaaS or eCommerce products.

And given that we know roughly how much CPC and volume is for certain keywords e.g email app then it's easy to get a picture of whether Apple is being unreasonable or not.
Yes. Apple forces you to buy their overpriced hardware if you want to develop for their platform.
OK - so its $800 - that makes the services provided by Apple even more value for money
I think in their minds the choice was:

Impbox and Imbox.

The least bad prevailed.

But that is an awful name that sounds like a toddler not getting their consonants right.
itsnotatypo.com
A curious thought experiment here is: what would the situation be in the case of a hypothetical third-party app that provided access to your Hey email?

(I mean via some API that Hey offered - I think they don't actually offer one, but it's a hypothetical.)

You would obviously still need a paid Hey account to use such an app, but there would be no way for the app's providers to enable you to sign up for one using Apple IAP. What then?