skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Both Google and Apple should be forced to fund the W3C and/or Mozilla in leading development of a cross-platform native experience

Private entities shouldn't be forced into doing anything on a whim. You can arguably stop them from doing some things, but there is no reasonable basis for compelling companies to do things as you are saying.

> Downvotes already? What's wrong with wanting an open platform?

The downvotes is because what you suggest is wholly antithetical to every "open" movement in history. You don't get to tell people what to do simply because you want it to be that way. That's tyranny.

> I think letting them work together on an open platform is less destructive and puts the world in a better place

Again with this whole thing. You don't get to enact whatever policies you want because you think it would be nice. People have rights.
It's my phone, and I can do whatever I want with it. If Apple doesn't like that, they can easily maintain ownership by not selling the device. I don't force Apple to sell iPhones instead of leaving them in a warehouse.

Once I've bought it, it is mine. The entire idea that Apple can do whatever they want on a device that they have already sold is ludicrous.
Apple is really good at reviewing apps. Why don't they review app store apps? Because they want to artificially suppress competition.
Wow, it's up over 10% since yesterday. At 1.84T, it's not that far away from 2T.

Though Saudi Aramco was the first company ever to hit 2T (back in December), so Apple wouldn't be the first, if it makes it.
The conversation here around the headline is pretty disappointing for HN.

It's a silly premise but the attempt at answering this question by scraping and correlating github activity and profiles is pretty great fun and hackery.

The conclusion, for those skimming the comments:

> That provides a p-value of 0.2371. We now have to conclude that the higher average we got isn’t statistically significant, since our p-value of 23.7% doesn’t meet the traditional 5% cutoff. Therefore, we must once again acquiesce to Betteridge’s law, and adopt our null hypothesis, that having an anime profile picture does not necessarily correlate with your abilities as a programmer.
This. Go choose a better job if you are poor. There are many.
All of that can be done while also not being a monopoly. Apple steals apps and recreates their own versions. They can remove your app for no reason on a whim because you might compete with them.

That's what the anti-monopoly is about. Frequently, apples 'pro consumer behavior' is demonstrably false, both from their hardware to their software. It's about making you artificially pay more for less and creating a culture of privledged users that mistake revocation of freedom as 'design' because they have the money to ignore reality.

Apple deserves any anti-monopoly actions it gets.
> The only difference is that you won't get a reputable slip of paper.

I would add the costs behind providing that slip of paper are not insignificant.

It requires having people with expert level knowledge of the field assess your work and your knowledge over a broad range of courses.

So universities in the US are ridiculously over priced, but the value they provide is still > 0.
Apple doesn't have to support other stores. If users don't like that idea, they can simply not use Apple products. Users have a choice.

If, however, you want to impose the support of other stores on Apple by the means of regulations, you're effectively supporting the use of the government's monopoly of force against a company that is building products that people are happy to pay a premium to buy products from (and therefore are perfectly fine with the app store).
But then he can do it again to pay for the second legal defense
BingBong
In "2020 Commission Report" by Jeffrey Lewis, North Korea nukes the US because of one twit. This looks very plausible to me.
yeah cuz a trillion dollar state entity is so strapped for cash it needs to steal 150k of bitcoin too, drawing attention to the scheme.
This kind of feels like "privilege" of the sort where you can kind of identify with this kid (he's a hacker, into computers) so you're excusing his actions.

Yes, everyone has done some dumb things at this age, but the consequences of this were pretty severe, and he certainly knew what he was doing. Just calling this a "meme-worthy fake post" is minimizing what he did.
It doesn't look like he's cracking his knuckles to me[0], but it's admittedly ambiguous.

And it's odd that cancel culture is being blamed here, and not the employer and their policies. Even the person who posted the image on social media has admitted they may have overreacted and said they didn't intend for the person to be fired, while your comment assumes that to have been the intent all along. Yet while the fault lies entirely with the employer, the blame inevitably is shifted entirely to activists on social media.

[0]https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-ove...
Then it shouldnt be a problem to allow alternative stores
The ability to communicate by smartphone is so ubiquitous in our society that it has effectively become a basic need on the level of electricity, water, natural gas, and internet access. The utility service that was land-line telephones is becoming obsolete, and it's becoming increasingly harder to participate in society without a smartphone and the ability to install apps on that smartphone.

In light of that reality, the duopoly of Apple and Google are effectively public utilities. They can no longer be considered solely as providers of discretionary consumer goods, and should be subject to additional scrutiny and regulation beyond that applied to ordinary commodity manufacturers.
There was once a time in popular music when you could actually understand the words coming out of a singer's mouth, as they weren't digitally over-processed, enhanced with autotune, and mixed into a zero-dynamic-range soup of loudness. Maybe I'm just old and out of touch, but I often can't tell the difference between modern pop song singers--many sound more like the output of a DSP than human.
You can say the same about Ma Bell, or Standard Oil.

The pre-edited version of the original post asked the ludicrous question "So now we’re going to have governments design the software in our phones", so he got a ludicrous answer in kind. But in theory, if Apple's control of the App Store platform constitutes a monopoly, it would not be gross government overreach to pursue antitrust, as it has done historically, even if it has been unfashionable in recent decades.
It's very expensive but doesn't scale linearly (random searches find 10 GB plans for $2400/m).
You just insulted the platform of an entire swath of developers. I'll take it you didn't intend to attack their work, because it sounded kind of close to that.

You're taking a very narrow point of view.

The web is the last free thing we have that keeps us from being eternally bound to rent seekers. You shouldn't attack it. You should be grateful for it.

It's because of things like the web and open source we have an incredibly vibrant industry where it's easy to get started from nothing. In the limit, if Apple and Google expressed complete and total control, we'd all just be employees and own none of it.
I don’t know. Even back when CDs where still a thing, I never listened/liked the full album of any band. I think the most was like 50%. Maybe the technological advancements only make visible what was there before: only a minority listens to everything by one artist. Most people prefer a song or two and skip the rest, but they aren’t forced to buy the whole album anymore.
I put a cheap lock on my door and someone breaks in and steals everything.

Should I be held liable for my poor security practices?
Transparency with a blur effect for windows. So you can see some of the color that's behind them without all the detail. I'm... not really a fan of it. It drives me crazy in windows that terminal transparency is for the entire window (even the text!) and not just the background.
> A degree gives you an opportunity to learn something in depth.

I'd like to add: "[...], and show people that you've done so."

I can learn a lot of things in-depth in my leisure time, yet I'll never obtain a certificate which states that I've got in-depth knowledge on a certain topic.
Let’s be precise here. You want to be able to choose.

If you can force thru a change to allow other app stores on an IDevice, and Apple still refuses to follow thru, then you can say you deserve it.

Wanting a thing is not the same as deserving it. Choice does not exist until you have options.

That said, I’m in favor of opening up other App Stores, so Apple can boot the all crapware and focus on a small number of high-quality, trustable apps, which they can market as such. Apple and the developers could charge a premium for being trusted and consumers would be able trust that they are actually receiving the best-in-class apps for their device.

Then, if consumers want to go to some cut-rate App Store and buy crap apps, that’s on them.

That’s a win-win all around.
They also favor their own apps or downright remove the competition.
I think we all agree on that, but the question was not whether this was an efficiently managed migration. I think we can assume OP made a similar argument up the chain (he got them to add SSD storage, at least).
Splunk taking minutes to load dashboard is not a problem imposed by post-calculation, it's more of a problem of lack of schema.

Most post calculation works on free text logs and thus has to regex it's way to a solution.
But it doesn't have to be that way; that's why the original poster talked about a lack of tooling in the post-calculation world
Does Walmart have a monopoly on cash registers inside a Walmart?
> Are you going to mandate what features Apple, or any manufacturer of devices with embedded software, can or cannot implement?

In fact, yes. Just like we mandate cars have seat belts and third brake lights, airliners have emergency exits, automobile fuel contains no lead or added ethanol, houses use electrical wires per code, and so forth.

Government can simply mandate a maximum fee (like credit card interchange fee regulation in the last decade), or force the system to allow sideloading (like busting the AT&T attached device monopoly in the 70s), etc.
Usefulness of software is not universally objective. Perhaps a paint-mixing simulator would be very useful to me. Probably most people don't care.

In the same way, everyone likes different music. It's just that some music is "harder to like" than others. Just as in software utility.
It doesn't actually do local dev, as it uploads your Worker somewhere to run, but the workflow is quite painless.
Show HN: A Podcasting Book
Actually, apparently it is going to be supported in Gtk 4. My bad, I haven't been keeping up with it.

https://developer.gnome.org/gsk4/stable/GskRenderNode.html#g...
> commitment to high quality apps

...that don't compete with Apple's own.
I guess by that logic it's our nation and we can pass whatever laws we like, and if Apple doesn't like it they can move to a different jurisdiction
I think the important part is that they apply the same rules to all the apps in their app store so it's a fair playing field between companies. IE they should not be allowed to for instance get into the dating market, and start by blocking Tinder.
CYO meaning choose your own?

I wouldn't hold my breath on the Topre front, the company is notoriously conservative in their offerings. They're also not mechanical switches; there's really no way to offer hotswap Topre switches. But there is a whole world out there other than Topre and Cherry. And you can swap them out easily since you have an ergodox ez. You can buy mechanical switches from several hobby sites like https://novelkeys.xyz/collections/switches, it's pretty much plug and play
I think it's interesting how few read to the end. The author is a "professor of the practice of public leadership." At a business school.

It's worth asking what a "professor of the practice of public leadership" is, because - with my combined liberal arts and STEM academic background - I honestly have no idea.

Which piques my curiosity, because this piece reads like a parable. Second son not interested in college? Never mind. He can always work dawn to dusk - note that work ethic - among "hard-working honest folk." And then join the marines. Where happiness ensues.

As career outcomes go, what could possibly be more wholesome and indeed American?

Which is why should we teach the liberal arts in colleges and schools. Because if we taught the liberal arts - including media literacy and critical thinking - this piece would be seen for what it is: a transparently manipulative piece of propaganda written by someone who works for a right-wing think tank.

Now - you can agree, or not agree, with the political positioning. But unless you are liberal arts-literate, you will not be agreeing freely. You will not know how a piece like this is crafted with stock techniques of manipulative rhetoric to persuade you of a point of view, and a course of action, and in fact a complete moral package, while appearing to be an entirely anodyne but reassuringly plain speaking personal story.

Because - apparently - that is what "the practice of public leadership" really is.
> There's no reason that this couldn't work via an online community.

We are rapidly testing this hypothesis during the current pandemic.
> Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US.

I mean, Youtube[1] and Facebook[2] already do this, and nobody has a problem with it. Do foreign-owned businesses not have first amendment rights?

I should also point out that honest journalistic reporting of the reality in the US is more than sufficient to create outrage and civil unrest in the US.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/28/study-of-youtube-comments-...

[2] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/the-far-r...
> we need to pivot away from unsustainable value structures

I think it's a category error to expect the CEO of the music distributor to be the one that stands up for the sustainability of music artists. Even if you did get a "benevolent dictator" figure in that position, it would likely crumble to a competitor who is focusing more on optimizing the value+experience for the listener.
But if someone "works out heavily and supplements," that should show up in self reported physical activity, and indirectly in BMI.

Well, not to nitpick, but people with high muscle mass can easily end up with an "obese" BMI even if they have very low body fat. And it also doesn't take very many hours of working out per week to get jacked if you're doing heavy weightlifting and supplementing.

No idea if such people are common enough to skew the results of this study significantly, but it still makes me wonder a bit.
I was expecting a one liner: "because banks do not lose money if fraud happens, as they simply trickle down costs to their customers".
I agree that happiness on a diet of achievements sets you up for failure. I also think that a lot of people know this intuitively but don't acknowledge it consciously or to others.

However, the author should have elaborated on "meaningful relationships". Dominant networking sites have imposed the unproved notion that "who you know" is more important than "who you are" and "what you know". Constant social comparisons encouraged by social media are also contributing to depression. As the author of a University of Houston 2015 study [0] stated: "This research and previous research indicates the act of socially comparing oneself to others is related to long-term destructive emotions".

[0] - https://uh.edu/news-events/stories/2015/April/040415FaceookS...
Do you think you would lose any of those benefits if Google had an iOS app store too? What if you also had the option of Microsoft iOS app store? Would the competition likely to increase pro-consumer benefits or decrease them?

Pro-consumer vs anti-publisher is a false equivalence. This is not a zero-sum game, not at all.
> the Slackdot effect

Supposing this was a typo, I'll trade you for one "rear window defrogger" and half a "string loaded door".
> OO languages added classes with fields, which are variables shared among methods

That's not true. Structs and other mutable, structured data objects existed long before OOP. The differentiating factor was that no functions/methods were able to have varying levels of access to those fields; everything was public all the time.

> The opposite of private/encapsulated.

I don't think that's fair. OOP added "private variables that survive past the end of a function", if you want to get pedantic, but I think there's plenty of added value to having this functionality in your toolbox. And yes, technically closures can accomplish the same thing, but most mainstream languages did not have them yet when OOP was on the rise and even then, using them to achieve "lasting, private, mutable state" is, IMO, one of the few cases where the OOP way of doing things is actually more ergonomic and expressive of intent than the functional way. OOP is fundamentally about state, so when you really have to manage some state, it is often the right way to do things. The problem comes when you assume preemptively that you need state in the first place.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/milestones/1
If the "mastermind" is a 17 year old, Jack should intervene to save his life from being ruined.
There are successful alternative app markets for Android, for example in South Korea. They are rare, because running an app market is in fact difficult. App search and discovery is not simple, neither is pushing update notifications. But it is possible, and when done competently (South Korean mobile telecom companies are competent; unbelievable, I know), the result is good.
I actually do just that: I don't buy apple's devices, for precisely this reason. And I happen to actually like them.

This argument you make is actually done to the death. If you don't like Jenko's oil (ever read "The Godfather"?), you may just not buy it. It is a monopoly, and it hurts consumers.

I'm actually very surprised that this freedom-loving public here on HN is so happy be restricted by their shiny digital handcuffs. Good that EU and US lawmakers are finally waking up to this abuse.
I have the iPhone XR for almost 2 years and the uncased exposed metal rim is virtually flawless. It's details like this that make me love the iPhone and is part of why I'm a longtime investor.
If you purchase the hardware for the product, no company should be able to stop you from installing whatever you like on the product.
Honestly I don't give a flying fuck about a company's market cap, I care about what it offers to me and the world.

Markets are a means to an end, not something to fetishize.
ios has reached a critical mass that makes it impossible to avoid for a huge number of apps if they want to be profitable, especially in rich countries.
don't cards require activation prior to use?
Do you live inside a walmart? Are you locked into walmart for 2-3 years after going there once?
And, if the unlocked store charges independent app developers lower fees, and if market trends favor the non-locked down store over the locked down store- say in the example of Android vs. BlackBerry OS- then the apps would flock to the former over the latter.
Don't you get a lot of that by using a payment system that uses the EMVCo tokenization scheme?

Apple Pay, for example, uses it.

https://www.emvco.com/emv-technologies/payment-tokenisation/
I agree, it's entertainment.

But do Pop artists generally spend years to publish an album?

I honestly don't know, I don't follow that world anymore.
I must have a smartphone.
Android is not usable because of the lack of privacy.

So I am forced to use an iPhone.
Regulation is necessary in Oligopolys.
DragonRuby, a game development toolkit using Ruby
The phrase “to forgive someone“ confuses me.

If you want to accept, no longer demand anything be said or done and move on wiser—and this is your definition of forgiveness—then I can understand that.

But forgiving someone implies you do, say or treat someone a certain way. Most of the posts imply the opposite.

I generally accept someone’s destructive past actions without demanding an apology and then move on with newfound caution and anger-dissolved-into-disappointment regarding that person, but would you say that is “forgiving someone”?
I'm not sure it's so unpopular of an opinion; at least, it's shared by me.

Your "silly parallels" make great points. In the "app store" analogy, it's not "apple eating itself", it's developers donating time to create apps who's profits are then used to purchase Apple. So it's a network of volunteer developers eating Apple[0], not "Apple eating itself".

In the case of GWEI, it's a network of blogs who are hosting the adsense code that is funding this project. I'd imagine the equivalent is "the developers of whatever is on these sites[1]" are, again, donating their time to purchase shares of Google.

After all is done, you can apparently provide your contact information and a portion of the shares collected will be distributed to you[2] but that feature is disabled.

Change it up a little bit and instead give the shares to the creators of the sites gaming the system. Now the developers aren't donating their time, they're working in a business and investing all of the profits in the company that's paying them (in delusional hope that they'll somehow be able to purchase all of the shares).

That's a whole lot more boring, and adding "delusional/somehow" was likely unnecessary. At the end of the day it's people doing (probably a substantial amount of) work to earn money, it's not a magical "self-powering" system (as Google Will Eat Itself implies).

Either way, if the site creators' purpose (or one of their purposes) was to provoke thought as a functional "art piece", it's very cool (sincerely). If it was to make a point of some kind, it's lost on me. If it was to actually own all of Google, this way ... well, good luck with that?

[0] I didn't see that coming when I wrote that sentence; no pun intended.

[1] Guessing the "network of sites" is landing pages or similar bunk that starts around page 3 of any sufficiently rare search term. Perhaps it's written up on the site and I didn't dig far enough.

[2] I'm not terribly clear on how that is supposed to work.
This shit is not working, and I guess it never did.
I don't get the fuzz about this. He can claim whatever he wants but fans will continue to listen to whatever they want. Artists can cater to it or not and all of it is outside of this CEO's control. It seems to be meant to discredit Spotify when I really don't think the alternatives are much better; even if alternatives currently pay artists better, they don't charge significantly more, which is the only way to pay artists more in the long run. Someone else said it somewhere in a subthread: charging subscribers enough to pay all those artists a livable wage just means they lose subscribers, go bankrupt (they're already not profitable), and end up paying artists zero in a few years.
Alternative: https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/31/21349920/twitter-hack-arr...
Why does “You may still fail despite your best efforts” mean the above quote about success is wrong?