skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, our municipal waste collectors kind of cross-finance fees for collecting the non-recyclable waste with the profit they make from selling recyclables. If someone steals cardboard, the other collection fees go up.
The issues with sodium are manageable, as seen in other sodium-cooled reactors like the Russian BN-XXX or the US EBR-II. Sodium has other good properties which make up for the downsides, which is why most fast reactor designs have chosen sodium has the coolant.
Microsoft has been openly using Rust since 2018. No hinting required.
What year is this? Linux desktop experience is fantastic in 2020. It has been for several years. That's bordering FUD you're spreading.
I would argue by overall books like Third Reich Trillogy from Richard J. Evans. Or by Hitlers biography by Ian Kershaw. Or the book on Wehrmacht. Arguing by speeches is futile, because that way you can prove Nazi both Communists and anti-communists. As people gladly do, to get back at contemporary enemies. Cherry picking from sentences from hours long speeches is easy especially since they tended to be more of emotional experiences then rational ones.

As for "west" framing, consider that French were traditional enemies of Germany. They even occupied portion of Germany (Ruhr in 1923) between wars, which added quite a lot of strength to Nazi. Germany fought in WWI against other western countries, lost, it was formative experience for majority of Nazi leadership. Germans were very resentful about loosing that war.

> just before the Nazis go explicitly totalitarian

I would argue that this was part of ideology from the very early stages. Not from very early begining, but quite soon.

> I don't believe that Max Mustermann would have given the consent of the governed[1] in 1933

Max Mustermann is fictional person. 1933 is when Nazi took full power, physically destroyed possible opposition and question of consent became moot.

> for "we're going to conquer everyone and kill millions of undesirables",

In 1933, nazi did not knew they will accomplish genocide yet. They knew Jews are the enemy, but they did not knew what they will do with them yet. All of that came later.

> Anyway, where we seem to differ is where best to address the problem of potential totalitarianism: with the many, or with the few? I believe it very difficult with the former, and impossible[3] with the latter.

I did not talked about this at all. I argued about what did actually happened in the past, not about what should have. I think that this question is not much meaningful, precisely because it is motivated by overly simplified reading of history and because such dilemma does not exist in practice.

In retrospect, having whole generation of young man turn grow as soldiers in a wold war, celebrating militarism, interpreting their violence as patriotism all breads next round of violence.
Most people don't have more than one phone. Phones are used for more than gaming. If a developer doesn't like Apple's terms, they can't distribute on iOS, except through a web app.

Perhaps PWA+WebGPU will solve this.
The legitimate business has a contract to pick up the garbage reliably. It costs a certain amount of money because the legitimate business will recoup costs. If they can’t do that because of the scavengers, the city, and consequently you and I, will have to pay more the next time the contract is negotiated.
WebKit, Swift, LLVM, that's it really. Relative to marketcap, Apple open sources the least, probably even less than Oracle, Intel, and friends. Swift and LLVM benefit from being open source--it would actually be unusable if it weren't. None of the things which give them market share like iMessage or their chip designs are remotely open source. It doesn't compare at all to Google's open source which includes Chromium, the entire Android operating system, Bazel, protocol buffers, Go--too many to list.
I agree, I have a little tool called `php-version-audit` that literally becomes useless after a few weeks without an update (you can't audit your php version without the knowledge of the latest CVEs). I have manually cleaned up old images like you say by clicking through them all, but having a way to define retention limits is a feature to me.
So what does epic games do while this is being litigated? Isn’t this the cash cow, I know they’ve got other games but still (as a windows gamer I look forward to all of you who have found in Epic your David; what a bs company). Do you try to force your way back in without the offending thing or what?

This whole thing seems super coordinated but with some real confusing missing pieces, but should be fun to watch!
People put a lot of weight in early studies from countries that didn’t see outbreaks in schools. My problem with those studies has been: 1) Community spread in those areas was very low. 2) Kids were/are not being tested at anywhere near the same rate as adults. 3) We really have no idea whether there are long term effects in asymptomatic individuals.

Regarding both 2 and 3, kids seem to be largely asymptomatic. That would explain the lower testing rates. People are generally not going to go have their kid swabbed if there’s no apparent reason to do so. But given that asymptomatic adults might have long term negative effects, it seems pretty cavalier to just assume kids won’t. Hopefully they don’t, but we really don’t know.

This type of thinking often gets dismissed as “alarmist”, however a bit of alarm (and an abundance of caution) over a rapidly spreading novel virus is warranted.

(This is my armchair analysis. I’m not a health expert.)
Disable ReMarkable Touchscreen with Evkill
Epic appears to have retained Cravath's antitrust team; e.g. https://www.cravath.com/cvarney/, who "is the only person to have served as both the U.S. Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust and as a Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission."
> It’s impossible to force a parent into the choice between working a life-threatening job interacting with the public or eviction so long as they have a child at home

Impossible? definitely not. (i would argue this is the exact issue many people in the US face today).

highly immoral and with a total disregard to one's decency or life? absolutely.
... and the Epic Game Store. They're setting themselves up for building precedent where in the future, an MMO uses EGS for distribution and bypasses the EGS payment model, and they won't have any legal teeth to challenge that without getting hit in the face with precedent they helped set.

Which may actually be the plan, as the EGS isn't the only revenue feather in their cap. If they're fine taking that hit because they get game devs twice (selling them distribution and selling them an engine their game is written in), more power to them.

In theory, one can model Apple the same way (i.e. the App Store is a distribution channel to encourage people to buy Apple hardware so they can use the channel), but it sounds like maybe Apple found a great rent opportunity and is reluctant to let it go. Time for someone to remind them they're a hardware company that writes software as an excuse for people to buy their hardware. ;)
This has been attempted before. Wind Mobile (now Freedom Mobile) was an upstart carrier that attempted to compete. They ended up just getting acquired though.

Their Wikipedia article paints a pretty bleak and accurate picture of the "competitive" landscape:

> Freedom Mobile Inc. is a Canadian wireless telecommunications provider owned by Shaw Communications. With 1,767,155 active subscribers (as of the end of February 29, 2020) in urban areas of Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta, it is Canada's fourth largest mobile network operator with 5% market share.[3]

> Founded in 2008 as Wind Mobile by the telecommunications company Globalive, Freedom was one of several new mobile carriers launched in Canada in 2008 after a government initiative to encourage competition in the wireless sector alongside Mobilicity (later acquired by Rogers Communications) and Public Mobile (later acquired by Telus).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Mobile
I would have preferred we did nothing and let the old people die too. they suck up all the money and housing.
That is quite fine for your personality and capabilities, however there are a lot of people who would love to have the freedom to choose differently.
> An amazing games company files suit against an anachronistic monopoly, and their suit reads:
I feel that Apple made a mistake.

App store fees are on the unjustified side in the current spectrum of value assessment.

The more reasonable approach is to figure out ways for customers to get more values from the platform, instead of extracting more efficiently.

I bet this decision is some form of lower-to-middle level decision, without consulting Tim and his close subordinates. I would expect Tim and his close subordinates to be sensitive enough to at least not doing something so abruptly (not that it's not complying with the rules). I would guess this decision didn't even surfaced to VP level. AFAIK, VPs should be owning such sensitive decisions at Apple.
As an Apple product user, I find their products+services+software the most enjoyable and more importantly the most trustworthy. I happily pay more $ for that attribute. Alternatives already exist for people who have other priorities (Android etc.).
I don't agree but you're going to have to explain yourself if you want to get the benefit of the doubt.
Android does not prevent you from side-loading applications from other stores either.
Recalibration is the biggest shake-up in the carbon dating world
Sure it is. Android phones are cheap, windows computers can be cheap, a home-build with linux would be cheaper.

The only 'expense' is the few hours to relearn a few keystrokes.

Yes, that might be an oversimplification, but it's really not that expeisve or difficult to move from one platform to antother.
He also made ZZT!

As far as 'getting into programming' goes, Sweeney is probably second only to Anders Heljsberg. Where the latter got me into 'proper' programming, until well into my late teens I was more interested in level editing and modding and whatnot.

In the same way that it was amazing to find out that the same guy was behind Turbo Pascal, Delphi and Typescript, it was amazing to discover that ZZT and UnrealED, years apart, were also just one guy. I spent so much time with these tools!
What happened to the days where everyone controlled their own domains/IP addresses/servers?

Why would anyone want to risk being deplatformed? I trust ICANN more than I trust Apple and ${CLOUD_PROVIDER}
1. It's clearly not a monopoly by any accepted definition.

2. If you don't want to pay their fees, don't use their platform.

3. If enough content providers don't use their platform, consumers we shift to a different one. I think one of the advantages that Sony has had over MSFT in the video game console space has been their exclusive content.

4. Taxes have literally nothing to do with this. The App Store has made life much easier for countless app creators. Are the fees exorbitant? Sure. Is the market capable of correcting this behavior across a reasonable timeline, also yes. I was planning to switch TV devices after Apple's tiff with Spotify. It was resolved because Apple knows that if they don't support the content providers other platforms do, they will lose market share.
Could you be more specific? Or say why you think that? An accusation like that should either not be spoken, or should have something concrete to substantiate it.
Epic has filed a legal complaint, according to their Twitter account: https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf
The App Store runs both app purchases and in-app purchases. Epic wants to be able to bypass the App Store for IAPs, paying 0%.
Image retention is 6 months though, so it seems slightly unclear if the timer starts counting from today or from Nov 1st.

Best to assume the worst but still plenty of time to write a cron that pulls all your images, assuming for some reason you need images you don't pull for > 6 months.
Epic is trying to sue an near $2 trillion dollar company. It's very dangerous to sue them alone. You need Microsoft and Facebook to back you guys up given that they kicked their apps out too.

Unfortunately, this app store sheriff is unreal.
(author here)

I'm not sure what you are referring to exactly, where do you think I say that?

These are the reasons I talk about in the blog:

* users can easily discover new applications,
* developers can easily publish their apps,
* and developing Snap itself is easier.
An in-app purchase system isn’t an App Store, and isn’t remotely similar. You get worldwide access to hundreds of markets in dozens of localized stores all in a system that makes billions of customers feel secure in purchasing from you. You also get Appleto distribute your apps for free as well! Spotify alone uses terabytes a day distributing to free users.

Opening up to other app stores would be a disaster for developers. Less secure, more scam are and malware, more confusing, lower consumer confidence, Balkanized app search, higher dev costs to support more stores, and for what? 20% fees at best?

Apples margins are publicly documented, no one could run a profitable app store for less than 20%.
Fortnite is multi-platform. Is Fortnite for iOS their cash cow? Maybe not.
It's actually dirt cheap. As a consumer I've moved from and to apple repeatedly over the years. The cost has always been nonexistent. I never buy Mac only software.

Replacing hardware is the expensive part. But again, if you want to change technology vendors, there's always a cost.
I've been an Apple user for 15+ years. However, my first 3 smartphones were Android. In 2016 I switched to an iPhone and I prefer the "lock in". I prefer the "walled garden".

In my youth I had the energy and desire to individually assess how much I trusted what I downloaded. Today I do not want to spend the energy/time so I spend financial capital to have Apple assess trust for me.

Does that mean that app developers have a harder time selling me their software? Yes. I empathize, but I don't want to be an early adopter anymore. I'm happy for those developers to first build trust, then have access to me as a customer.
On Android I pay a one time fee of $25 to get access to the play store. On Apple I pay $100 every year plus they are total dicks about it. The fee is $100 yet I pay even more although my currency is stronger than the dollar plus sales tax!
> US Government, please force Apple to open up iPhone to any software we want to install. It's a generic computer.

You have bazillion types of generic computers to choose from. People pay huge overhead to apple exactly because apple makes choices for them - regarding what settings are reasonable to have, what software they want you to use etc.

Personally I don't understand monopoly arguments. If we are talking about some ISP, something like Nestle or even social network/apps, I can somewhat understand it. But here? Users are people who bought Apple hardware to use it based on rules set up by Apple.

I'm not much fan of Apple, I sincerely want to understand the monopoly argument. It seems to me as if people would want to split BMW because .. I don't know we want to be able to install our own custom AC. Because maintenance of the stock one is too expensive.
Factor in time wasted at the airport when you show up early because the TSA is unreliable. I always give myself at least an hour extra and sometimes that's cutting it razor close.

And frankly not being subjected to the TSA is generally worth at least a few hours of my time. I'll sooner drive six hours than fly one because of those worthless assholes.
Fortnite isn't a computer on which a majority of Americans accesses their news and other content.
Apple should either charge based on usage of their resources
i.e

% charge for payments through apple pay

$ per million downloads/updates for hosting

or provide the ability to sideload or use third party app stores

That way app developers can choose whether Apples store is worth their overhead.
> It's not a monopoly, there is NO definition that fits for Apple being a monopoly.

Sure there is. It has a monopoly over apps that consumers install on apple phones.

That is a huge market, and one that apple has monopoly control over.
The real problem I think is that it is extremely hard to get users to understand what exactly they are signing up for when they do that…
As far as I remember it is a perfect Nash-Pareto equilibrium strategy: "keep the same price as the other side until the other side changes it". And, if all sides follow this strategy then prices are always $50
They absolutely baited Apple to do this, I'm actually glad they did it. It's time someone takes a stand. I think this will be more significant than people think. Remember it was Netscape that helped bring about Microsoft's anti-trust.
As Picard would say, "Make it so"

(•_•) ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
>I have greater faith in the uber-nerd vs the perfect production manager.

I have greater faith in the company with over $200 billion cash on hand, that can throw a ton of money at a long drawn out court battle.
Yay, I need a VPN to subscribe to the VPN that I had no need for.

I'd be absolutely ok to have yearly subscription for Firefox that ensures no braindead UI changes are shoved down.
They would certainly have been happier with an outcome where apple left their app up and accepted the change. But they knew that was not in the cards because they almost certainly talked with apple about this beforehand. There is no chance that this was not discussed between executives at both companies. 100% there were meetings. 100% at some point epic informed apple that they were going to make the change, and of what would happen if apple banned them. There was no baiting involved.
We need you and your points are totally valid.
Monopoly definition is so much outdated.

Everything that has 10% market share should have some kind of regulation for things like this.

Defining things like this is hard though. What to regulate is hard too.
I don't see a moral claim being made at all in my post. Morals are a completely different dimension than government law. I think you're conflating the two.
On ubuntu it requires snap if you want it prepackaged.
My post is being downvoted and I have no idea why. I didn't say anything against the rules and wasn't being annoying I don't think. I guess this topic is too political for discussion.
Parents have good reason to be worried, not so much that their kids will suffer permanent complications, but that they will spread it around the whole family, hitting the elderly hardest.

Teachers have a right to be heard on this as well.
To be honest, I can't really tell the difference between an absolute expert and a relative expert anymore, at this point I think everyone's just a relative expert
Are you confusing harm with death rates? It's a novel virus and we still do not know the long term health impacts of it.
Unless they somehow are suing Epic directly, it would be ill advised to submit paperwork in response to a claim that does not address the specific claims made.
Sorry but I don't get it. The legitimate borders of Israel were established after the 1948 war, the famous "green line". Israel doesn't need any agreement with anyone else to just withdraw inside those borders. Once it will have done it, it will be able to speak from a position of legitimacy. At the moment it's like a bag snatcher who keeps asking for "agreements" but doesn't want to give the bag back.
>apps only being available on the small number of devices running the OS they were developed for.

that is a weird complaint because that is the status quo due to closed platforms, I can't run facetime on an android phone.

Diverse ecosystems develop protocols to enable interoperability, that's where the slogan "protocols, not platforms" comes from. This is how the internet works, despite the fact that you can hook up anything from a fridge running windows ME to a supercomputer running suse to it, everyone communicates just fine.
Back when CompUSA/Circuit City were where most people bought software, it was more like 50-60%.
My parents' iPhones: 0 sketchy apps or browser plugins
My parents' Macs: every sketchy app and browser plugin available on macOS
A couple people have brought up what you're saying, and it's a somewhat convincing argument to me, at least at first glance. It's not just that having a new equilibrium is fine -- the existing equilibrium where cardboard offsets the cost of expensive trash is explicitly what we don't want as a society.

We want people to throw away more cardboard, because we want it to get recycled. A system where throwing away 'unprofitable' trash costs more than throwing away cardboard seems like a net good.

Even at a personal level, if the 'thefts' causes cities to raise prices across the board, but all of the cardboard is getting pulled out my trash by 'thieves', thus decreasing my overall volume and cost, then it seems like it still kind of evens out for me as an individual and rewards me for throwing out recyclable materials.

And communities/households that reliably throw out a lot of cardboard will be hit by 'thefts' more often, which will lower their trash bills even more, which is... yet another outcome we actually want -- systemic, community-wide, reliable disposal of recyclable materials.
It's not that much considering that it's more or less evenly spread over a "surface" bigger than the whole planet.

A Kessler syndrome with that many satellites would ground us for some time, though. (but it would be somewhat mediated by the low degrading orbit of these satellites)
That's weird, I went to the Google Play store but it didn't allow me to install an app on my iPhone at all. Why on earth would you think these two are somehow in competition.
I have both the Humble Bundle store and F-Droid installed on my Android devices. While their UI is inferior to the Play store and granting them permission to install isn't enabled by default like it is for the Play Store, they exist and work just fine.
They have serious coverage issues, even in Calgary, where they are headquartered. By the time their coverage converges that of the big players, I expect so do their prices. Right now, they are not a realistic option for most people because of the coverage issue.
> But there are other Smartphone platforms with their own store, correct?

But are they competing or parallel markets? Does Apple changing pricing or terms on the App Store drive business to other app stores, as replacements, or do software vendors choose which app stores to distribute with based on whether each provides a benefit worth the price, but not whether it is a better deal than some other store?

I think that under market/pricing power tests, Apple’s software distribution business in the App Store is not that unlikely to be a monopoly.

Now, establishing consumer harms from the way the leverage that monopoly to extract rents and dictate terms to software vendors might be less straightforward than it would be for a B2C monopoly, and in the US, at least, consumer harm is the key adverse impact from monopoly abuse that justifies legal consequences.
Why did you squeeze so many release names into that comment?
Strategically it may be that Mozilla should have done that years ago, when Firefox had substantial market share and therefore a lot of effect on the user population.

By accepting the Google cheque, they directed people towards Google and may have indirectly funded Chrome and monoculture.

If they had directed people towards Bing when they had 30% market share, that may have resulted in a search engine duopoly instead, and a greater chance of Microsoft selecting and funding Gecko/Servo instead of Blink.
> Then we'd actually put real effort into controlling it so we could go back to life as normal even with the virus not fully eradicated.

ok now imagine the virus lives on surfaces for 5+ years and never dies. now what? you can’t eradicate this virus by quarantining, someone, and it only takes one, is going to spread it somehow.

now answer with that in mind. “we would just fix it” is a cop out, we can’t fix it.