skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yup. We have similar behaviour with cell phone companies here in South Africa. The big two have reached a stable state, are happy with their market share, and know that as long as they don't directly talk to each other when raising prices, they are legally in the clear.
How much Big Tech pledged to racial justice
Uber, Lyft Are Denied Extended Delay of Driver Pay Order
On the contrary, it kind of encourages it https://kyren.github.io/2018/09/14/rustconf-talk.html
Google Search should be free to only show location results from Google Maps, and ban Yelp, etc.. entirely from Google Search. After all, there's other search engines, right?

There is a history here where using your market position in one area to force your product in another as being illegal (see the recent EU fine against Google for "abusing their Android monopoly" for example: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_18_... ). Apple seems to be crossing that line rather brazenly.
What got banned by apple ?
“Mona Lisa was married to a slave trader” —- wasn’t exactly what I was thinking. How about the modern press where the elite members have ‘Au Pairs’ or underpay both legal citizens & undocumented workers to take care of their homes? There are even true indentured servants in the US and all around the world.

Yet let’s ‘contextualize’ the darkness of the Renaissance.
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.

The parent will not abandon the child home alone to go to work, no matter how big the stick.

School being effectively state subsidized working hours daycare, it must resume before low wage workers can once again be coerced back into risking their lives to avoid homelessness.
Nice background. Thank you. What's interesting to me is that the world's "leading" chipmaker got caught off-guard by lacking multithreading performance. You'd think that these world experts wouldn't have that blind spot.
You seem to have forgotten about Android. The solution to anti-trust cases is not a blanket “break them up. In this case, requiring Apple to allow third-party App Stores is going to be the key issue. The lawyers will likely take heavy inspiration from Microsoft’s antitrust suit from the early 00s
They signed up for the GPT-3 beta and made an api call
You can avoid Google Play on Android by sideloading. You can avoid Steam on PC by distributing your game yourself. You can't avoid the App Store on iOS unless you tell all of your customers to jailbreak.
> Launchpad is also objectively more complex and hard to use than alternatives, and subjectively I'd say it's ugly and looks dated

Launchpad is _really_ old though. When it was open sourced, there were very few alternatives and those were often even more complex and harder to use.

I think part of the reason why it was almost never used was because it does so much: project management, bug trackers, build service, package hosting, ISO and distro building, ..

If you only need a few of these features, you are much better of using alternatives with a smaller scope.
I have a feeling we will see a bunch of AMD vulnerabilities revealed in the coming years. Researchers haven’t really had time to study AMD’s micro architecture yet and it was not really a priority because of low penetration in the server market. In theory intel should have less bugs since they have massive design verification teams.
I think this is called tacit collusion.

You see something like this with gasoline pricing - major brands will have "competing" stations across the street from each other, but their prices moves in lock step without a race to the bottom.

Memory vendors have explicitly colluded in the past, but they really didn't need to - they just needed to copy their competitors' posted pricing. Presumably that is what they do now.

If there are high barriers to new competitors entering the market, then the situation is unlikely to change.
I think you're confused. The historic part isn't the postponement (not even cancellation) of the annexation plan, but the official signed peace treaty between Israel and the UAE. That's objectively historic, whether or not you think it's a good thing, and whatever your opinions are of the involved parties.
Apple wins this in a walk-over.

And as an iOS developer, I get a lot of benefits from the App Store that makes their 30% more than reasonable.
Yeah, I think the lack of control is a key observation here. I bet most people would tell you they're more scared of plane crashes than car accidents, even though most people are at much larger risk of a car accident.
Probably whoever works at the desk there has no idea how to get in touch with the department responsible for investigating internet crimes. They're probably in another office far away, and never interact with each other.
In the olden days of game stores shelf space was at a premium so the power dynamic was on the side of the retailer, particularly with the larger chains who had a lot of room to negotiate their cut rather than buying wholesale.
Fair, and I agree. I've actually added notifications for myself via http://hnreplies.com/, but the reason is to reduce my impulse to log in and scan my comments for replies; I filter notification emails into a dedicated folder that I can check when I want — no interruptions.
Yeah, you don't have to write the game engine from scratch.
Apple is also very proud of being a a lot larger share of the mobile apps/content market, which is what everyone elses legal team will say. (And which is why this is actually such a big thing: if loosing iOS customers meant loosing <20% of revenue, app makers would be a lot less fussed about this)
The author mentions popularity as a justification and good reason to go with a central snap store. I am baffled.
This is one of the games Apple likes to “feature” regularly. They basically strongly encouraged people to buy this game one week, and yanked it from the store the week after. The game “owners” should be livid.
Something insinuates that you're not being entirely honest in your arguments.
What's the context and TLDR?
Could they have been baiting it out of Apple on purpose?
I've never seen a manager operate like that and if yours does then you should look into moving.
Third party stores would be a disaster for customers and developers, even worse than the ones on Android.
Epic is going to lose this case.
Do you think the palastinians in Lebanon and Jordan (not many in egypt) are the reason for those countries being very poor dictatorships?
According to BUsiness insider

That well known medical journal.
The way you describe it here actually makes them sound pretty similar. Isn't Windows Microsoft's platform?
Cool. I am also an iOS developer and get almost nothing for the 30% I pay Apple. It would be trivial to build my own in-app payments system using Stripe for like 3%.

Giving customers choice and encouraging competition is a good thing.
Makes sense in the US. The Trump administration has done an abhorrent job handling the virus and isn't making the slightest effort to change course.
The risk in children is from diabetes and metabolic syndrome, conversely what protects children most is a relatively well functioning immune system.

As we've seen that coronavirus immunity is enhanced with exposure to other coronaviruses, and innate immune system function, it appears children should not be isolated. By this rationale, they shouldn't even be wearing masks.
It will be funny to read Apple's excuses how they are not a monopoly and how consumers are benefiting from their no competition allowed policy.
Sad :(
This would make sense to be punished I guess (since it's damaging property)
The interesting thing is that it didn't hit the user directly until now - from what I can tell, Epic Games were quite happy to charge the same amount on platforms like PC and pocket the extra 30% right up until the day that they pulled off this stunt and needed to spin Apple's cut as something that cost consumers money rather than Epic, and presumably they'll put the prices right back to normal if they win.

The other interesting thing is that they're charging the reduced price on consoles which I believe take a similar 30% cut to Apple.
> Paynent processors are entirely irrelevant to this discussion, given app stores do far more than just payment processing.

Not for in-app purchases they don't, which is why I specifically called that one out. The game provides all the UX there to find & purchase the items, the game "delivers" the resulting purchased goods, etc... All the app store does in that case is facilitate payment. No different than, say, Square.
They knew this will cost them millions until Fortnite is back on the store and they still did it.
> Can I ask - do you contribute meaningfully to any open source packages?

Yes.

> Do you buy software at a significant commercial level?

No.

> I think Redhat did the gatekeeper to 30 billion route.

Where's the RedHat app store?

Which version of RHEL is targeted at embedded devices yet requires an internet connection to install to validate your SSO credentials?

Their business model is support and to my knowledge they have made no attempt to maneuver into a gatekeeping position in envy of Apple and Google's app store rents.

> What's weird is part of the value ADD for other companies in the tech space is the cloud account that you are railing against.

Yes, they've been told the cloud is this magic thing which allows them to abdicate administrative and operational responsibility for their infrastructure if they just pay 10x as much. And they believed it. If Canonical wants to milk that cow, good luck and godspeed. Debian awaits. I am not afraid of complexity, I know the "cloud" score, and have no interest in abdicating any authority over my personal systems or systems I am professionally responsible for.

> The same "you are dead to me" ragers are often knee deep in google account / xbox account / netflix go anywhere accounts etc.

I don't own a console. I don't have social media accounts. I don't subscribe to media services. I host every network, compute, and data service I consume to the extent that is practical -- moreover, they are all publicly available and free to use without advertising or donation. My condolences for the frustration you've experienced monetizing that straw man, though.
Is 30% reasonable? I don't think anyone is arguing it should be zero, but 30% is quite a lot.
that escalated quickly. some prominent names from the Epic side. it will be interesting to follow this
I believe that this kind of work environment must exist, because it's such a strong trope, but honestly I've never really worked in a place like this. I'm sorry for people who do, and who feel stuck there. Not all software engineering is like this.

But if I had a work environment like this, I would be blaming management, and not Jira.

And I should have been clear: not many engineers are actually "how dare you interrupt me, I'm an ENGINEER" types, in my experience.

But I guess I've seen enough blog posts that are so precious about being a software engineer, and so (perhaps unintentionally) dismissive of other people in the org who are also trying to do their jobs, that I probably got triggered a little.
> I am just so confused why some people are acting like kids are a different species when it comes to covid.

That was what the Chinese data said - they had fewer cases so presumably they didn't see the full range of possibilities.
Major antibody study estimates 3.4M in England had COVID-19
Counterpoints, which I'm surprised I have to spell out, are:

1. Limits. The above doesn't apply when $Z > $X, above which the attachment has full effect.

2. Reputation. The sources of recurring $X + $Y have decision making powers with a time lag. They may not be willing to give $X + $Y again if they know it was entirely spent on group B last time.

3. Anticipation. Organization decision makers know 2. Which makes donations with conditions attached into a signal with some effect, rather than something freely fungible with no pressure.

If we were to plot a curve of notional pressure and effect on the organization's budgeting decisions, I would expect a curve increasing with the ratio $Z/($X+$Y). A very shallow curve perhaps. But not a flat zero in the range 0..$X as you are suggesting.
Maybe I've had a 30-year string of bad luck.
This seems like a worthless comparison. One hundred percent of parents can get C19 and 100% of their children can get it too. How many of these parents still have jobs? The unemployment rate for parents is probably lower than the aggregate population. Again, this (5x!) is a worthless comparison.
There is a massive, silent demographic who wants a return to status quo.

There was a conference call with the school district the other night. A friend in the district was in awe at how many parents want their children to return to school, are upset about sports, etc.

Many people want to look at this as a black and white issue - either you believe social distancing and masks are necessary, or you believe that Bill Gates wants to put a microchip in your head. The media is of course greatly to blame for this.

The reality is that there are many people who share different priorities than vocal groups on the Internet. Several times I have written blog posts about lay statistical analysis of the virus, and how more conservative states have the benefit of seeing reopening in action in states like Florida and Texas. Many of the responses assume I am against masks, against social distancing, trolling etc. No discourse is possible.
Collective clog control: Ants optimize traffic flow in excavation
Good question, I didn't really mean all those people had jobs, I guess what I really meant was more like if you're not careful in choosing who you ask you'll end up with 1000 people who have safe jobs, or just a way larger percent of people who have safe jobs than do in the general population.
Yes they brilliantly baited Apple into crushing Epic in court.
Well that was expected and was quick wasn't it?

Unfortunately Apple's the sherrif in the app store and doesn't give a damn.

Unreal.
Businesses are legal fictions. There is no inherent reason shareholders should be the only constituency businesses serve.
"Ayo, lesson here, Bey. You come at the king, you best not miss."

-Omar Little

(I like this version better)
IMO The key takeaway is that developers are no longer afraid of Apple. Epic Games move would be unthinkable a few years ago. Looks like this will become common practice. Epic Games joins Spotify, what will be joined by X, Y.

Maybe at some point multiple developers will also follow and also file legal actions.
Right, it looks to me like they violated Apple’s policies in order to bring this lawsuit. It isn’t the other way around. I don’t think this is primarily about the 30% cut in Fortnite — Epic wants to run their own iOS App Store.
If the wholesale cost is too close to MSRP, retailers will generally either refuse to carry the product or sell it above MSRP.
Doesn't look convenient due to this:

lxd - Transitional package - lxd -> snap (lxd)
The truth is, getting split up isn't even a punishment! When companies get split up for being a monopoly, they usually end up being even more valuable than when they were a monopoly. See Bell Telephone for a good example of this.

When IBM unbundled their software from their hardware in response to DoJ antitrust inquiries, it created the modern software industry.
Of course Google considers SEO a bug. The entire point of SEO is tricking google into thinking a page should be the top result. Google's goal isn't to always show the page with the best SEO, it's to show the page the searcher is searching for. Google has been in a continuous battle to stop SEO since it's inception.
> push context down, not decisions

whats the difference? either way the context or decision is defined by someone else, and you're still the one swinging the hammer.

I actually think there's a major problem in engineering where many don't take charge of their lives and want to guide the decisions. Its a weird Stockholm syndrome love-affair with being the engineer. Idealism is also a problem ("it doesn't have to be like that.").

> (most) of the devs much happier

yeah, but not the ambitious ones I was talking about.

I'm not knocking engineering, I'm saying it's a stepping stone in your career, and not a long term place if you want to influence trajectory within a company.
I spent some time in the region in 2017 (Gaza / West Bank / Israel), and it was obvious to me that nothing would change for Palestinians until an Islamic country was able to represent their interests through diplomatic relations with Israel.

I think this is great news and I'm very excited to see where it leads.
Yes, as I was typing this up I began to realize that's where I was really going. Essentially turning an entire struct of, say, { int A; string B; Thingy C } into only a set of promises about being able to get an int, a string, a Thingy, etc., and promises around being able to set them (let's just do a struct for now, no methods or hiding), and then decoupling the type, being the set of promises being made, from the structure, being the concrete layout in memory and corresponding code capable of fulfilling those promises.

It's all easy in the simple struct case, gets more interesting when you start trying to manipulate them by putting them into arrays or associative maps, etc.

On the one hand, this is nearly revolutionary in some sense, but in another it's simply an incremental advance in a direction we're already going. "Object's are a poor man's closures, closures are a poor man's objects" being an old saying leaning in this direction, and it's hardly a new observation in Haskell that there's not a heck of a lot of practical difference between an associative array of X -> Y and a function (x -> y), at least when it comes to reading them.
Donated trees in the Amazon Rainforest for each sale
When I first decided to write and publish a book [1] about my experiences of building, marketing and selling a side-project, I've also decided that I would use some of the revenue for a good cause.

About a year back, I came across videos [2] that show the destruction of the Amazon forest and its animal inhabitants.

It is in our responsibility, absolutely everybody, to take a good care for the planet we live on and make it a better place for us and for all. That's the reason why I've decided to contribute towards planting trees in the Amazon Rain forest.

A cool side effect to this - I gifted these trees, each one to each of my readers. They've received a pretty neat E-card with a thank you note

I hope to see more entrepreneurs doing similar feats.

[1] https://gum.co/side-project

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkaV2jJMqe4
As an iOS developer, it’s an easy argument to make because it’s true.
Free for 24 Hours
By building their own payment system, Epic is definitely arguing it should be zero.
Sounds like they'll have lots of damages to point to.
I have a suspicion the supply side of this market equation is artificially constrained by people who have an interest (social and financial) in keeping it so, and that is part of why we've seen CEO pay go up so much in the last few decades.

There are plenty of people who could do well in the CEO job at most companies—no worse than the average we're getting now, anyway. There are far fewer "CEO types".
Visa / Mastercard don't forbid you to use Amex or cash.
It's a right PITA open-sourcing a server component that ties into various back-end business processes, and a completely thankless task.
Not at all surprised they didn't bother. It's not like they're swimming in money anymore, they have to be more careful what they spend time and money on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF7M-KzjrXY
> It's not a monopoly issue, it is an anti-competitive issue.

Indeed. It is a common misconception that antitrust only applies to monopolies. You can engage in anti-competitive behavior of various kinds, illegally, without actually having a monopoly in strict terms.
Risk and uncertainty go hand-in-hand. It’s clear what the risks are, generally, with cars. It’s unclear what the risks are with a novel pathogen.
It seems like the better approach here is to go the EU route.

They will be much more likely to act as this is anticompetitive (and plus it is a non-EU company).
How would that be worse? Always having the option to install whatever you want on device you own is the most pro customer thing ever
* summary article [1]

* related read about ant societies [2]

[1]: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180816143231.h...
[2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/121819a0
How sparse is LEO? 12,000 satellites sounds like a lot and what if we come to a point where we can't safely launch rockets with passengers to Mars?
Is Tencent a majority share holder in Epic Games?
If the names were swapped, one of them would still be wrong and the other right. Taking sides on this issue the whole point of this discussion regardless of who's involved.
Plus we know nothing about the long term health consequences. Kids may not be dying at a high rate but they may suffer long term heart, lung, or organ damage. It feels like everyone is just assuming that if it isn’t death then it is fine. Just because you survive something doesn’t make you stronger.
>form of the Google Play Store.

You can get Android apps from many locations other than the Google Play Store.
What's fascinating about 2020 is that for the first time we can radically reduce our total energy usage (as you advocated) while keeping a nearly identical current lifestyle.

How? Electrical systems (e.g. cars/heat pumps etc.) are much more efficient than fossil fuel equivalents. An example, most new gas cars get ~30 mpg today, but a Tesla model 3 gets 141 mpge. So switching from a gas-powered car to a model 3 results in a 75% reduction in energy usage (as you advocate) with the identical ‘lifestyle’. [1]

This effect is found far more generally. Quoting from a detailed report [2] on how to decarbonize America, “One key aspect of electrification makes this transformation possible, and it represents perhaps the most astonishing finding in Griffith’s modeling: Large-scale electrification would slash total US primary energy demand in half, from around 100 quads to about 45-50. This a huge deal — it means America only needs to produce about half the energy with renewables that it is currently producing with fossil fuels.”

I strongly support, dense walkable cities and public transit, but for the first time in history we’ve separated the task of reducing energy usage from convincing most Americans to give up the lifestyle they’re used to. It’s incredibly promising news for the energy transition!

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2020/02/19/the-epa...

[2] https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/21349200/climate-...
Fortnite for ducking fees