skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> AFAIK it's very clear on Adobe's page that your options are (1) Annual plan paid monthly, (2) Annual plan prepaid, and depending on the product (3) Monthly plan at usually 150% higher price.

No, it’s the opposite of very clear? It’s very misleading. They are purposefully avoiding printing the full sum they expect you to pay, just listing monthly prices without mentioning the terms, and a big “buy now” button.

I understand that you should never take anything related to pricing at face value, and I would certainly double check what I get myself into before I sign up, but calling it “very clear” just doesn’t add up.
oh. that was years ago, probably in 2015 i guess
> "literally trying to shave a ¥100 from the engine control unit of a new vehicle. A new design! Once they entered production they were going to shave the cost even more on the backs of their suppliers."

Nothing like the possibilities of massive economies of scale. There's a reason Toyotas are such good values.
I think Free software has lost. Open Source is a far more popular brand (thanks to big tech, no surprise there) and it's designed to keep Free software ideas digestible by corporations.

Big tech has learned how to keep Free software at bay, to the point that loving or hating the FSF doesn't matter anymore. It's irrelevant.

> I'm sad they can't learn to love GNU projects.

I think you don't realize how this sentence comes across. In some ways, it's an extremely concise way of describing why the FSF has failed.
If matters of taste are not debatable then why do people do it about art?
I just assume every page on Wikipedia is left based at this point, I don't mind, seems to do the job. I think most right leaning people in the digital age realise that you have to get your information from further sources at this point.
Increasing income inequality does not necessarily imply that. In fact, the US poverty rate has been more or less stable for the past 50 years[1]. And the worldwide poverty rate is dropping like a stone.

[1] To be clear, I very much view this as a failure given how much richer the US has become in the same period. Nevertheless, it is not true (or at least not clear) that the portion of people who are able to actualize their potential is falling.
Why wouldn't you consider right-of-way costs?
Depends upon the jurisdiction. Under Australian legislation this is likely to be considered misleading and deceptive conduct toward retail consumers, and Adobe could be subject to significant financial restitution.

It's past time that consumers in the US realized their utter lack of power as individuals against corporations, and their collective might. The 'dark patterns' in online commerce, car loans, mobile payments etc are really 19th century business practices that shouldn't be accepted anymore.
We used to buy multiple licenses of their Creative Suite. We'd renew the licenses every year or, sometimes, if we could not justify it, wait a year or two. I believe the last version we got was CS6. That's when they went to their subscription model.

I understand why companies like to do this. I get it. However, if we went along with every single one of these transitions to monthly subscription models we would bleed money every month unnecessarily.

What happened since then? The CS6 suite works just fine. Tools such as GIMP have become better and better. There are a number of good video editors, file converters and other tools out there.

We used to also update our Corel tools every year. Now they want subscription. We are done with Core.

The next victim will be Altium Designer. We have probably put somewhere in the order of $30K per license into this tool over the years. Annual maintenance is in the order of $1,500 to $1,800 (can't remember). No more. I have decided we are going to switch to KiCAD by the end of the year and donate half of our Altium maintenance fee towards KiCAD development (as well as contribute with software development if we have the time).

It isn't that I have a problem with subscriptions. We subscribe to Jetbrains tools and will continue to do so. It's more of a question of what you get incrementally for your money. And, in addition to this, getting cutoff if you stop paying.

As everyone on the planet knows by now, shit can happen that can put a serious kink into your finances. The old model meant that we could keep using our software until things got better and update when it made sense. As an example, we've done this kind of thing with Solidworks. Went a couple of years without updates and then updated all seats to the latest version when it made sense.

The Jetbrains subscription model is great. If you stop your subscription you revert back to the version from one year ago (I may not have put that exactly right, but it's close). That's fair. I can work with that. If I need to save money for any reason at all I can put it on ice, keep working and get updated back to the current version when it makes sense.

Adobe and others seem to be very different, brutally so. If you stop paying you lose your ability to work. To repeat myself, that is brutally painful. Others have things like cutting your off from bug fixes to even your last licensed version and cutting you off from accessing their peer-to-peer support forum.

I can't claim to know the internals of their business equation. All I know is that, as a customer, I dislike monthly subscriptions that cut you off like and make the very tools you need to do your job evaporate instantly. That, I think, is wrong.

These are tools. I need to own my tools. That's why I buy equipment instead of leasing it.

Did Adobe change? Do you get to keep and use any version of the software at all if you stop paying?

I believe Microsoft Office 360 is the same.

I know this kind of software can be a tough business due to piracy.
You can always ruin the paths they walk on with just your hand or a rag or whatever.

As far as cat event repelling them, I have no idea.
That video specifies to undo all the manual styling which tailwind encourages and that’s exactly what I’m doing.

The point is undoing single element styling would never would have been necessary if tailwind didn’t encourage styling single elements (saying that “best practices aren’t”) in the first place.

The author literally even mentions we should use “symantic descriptive names”. You know, like those best practices that tailwind says don’t work.
I honestly don’t see a reward for developing a non monetized application on another platform. Especially so if it’s going to just be a stripped version (no Apple Pay, no Find My integration) and they would lose users in doing so.
Look, if the "Annual" in the name is not clue enough for the person. They are just paying tax for not being able to read.

This is not 75th page on the user agreement, it's the first word in the product name he is trying to buy.
I've also seen this referred to as guillotine protection taxes.
> where people have to duke it out and address all serious arguments before the public sees it

This has come up a bit recently. However, I think you're underestimating the effect of "Sea Lioning" and alike. Experts are often busy, doing important things in their respective fields. They don't have time to duke it out.
Near miss. https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinedryl is an antiemetic (preventing motion sickness) based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxastine
Housing built small in the 1960's is still going for unaffordable for most rates in my area ...
Dynamic photodiodes: single-photon sensitivity at low voltages and minimal noise
I suspect that in 100 years time getting rich through Silicon Valley style tech companies will be a lot less common. Tech will have been throughly commoditized, it'll be cheap to build things, and most of the knowledge will have been disseminated around the world. Anyone in a small city will be able to hire enough developer talent to compete.

We're still near the beginning of the internet revolution. We're in the era where the inventors of things can get rich through their own talents. In every other industry that has undergone a technological leap forwards the same thing has happened until other people have bought up their talent and ideas and the inventors no longer make the big money. Just look at agriculture, manufacturing, publishing, news, automotive, aerospace, computing... They all saw the same cycle. The internet won't be different.
Related to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26770562
How deceptive is it from 1-10, if the name of the product starts with the word "Annual".
the worst so far
I’ve lived in the UK and Germany and it’s incredibly rare that I’ve seen prices printed on the goods themselves. There’s a label on the shelf with the price. Even when there is a price on the box (usually much smaller stores - never supermarkets), the label on the shelf is often a different price.
This could be a country specific thing but Adobe’s Australian site does not say that at all, quite the opposite. It doesn’t even state the monthly price in the terms, just refers to them.

> “ Your subscription will automatically renew annually without notice until you cancel. You authorize us to store your payment method(s) and to automatically charge your payment method(s) every month until you cancel. We will automatically charge you the then-current rate for your plan, plus applicable taxes (such as VAT or GST if the rate does not include it), every month of your annual contract until you cancel.”

Adobe will renew it for another year at whatever rate they choose without notice.

I agree people should be more responsible in general with contracts, but it should be standardised. Australia’s design for the critical information sheet is great, it clearly shows what your paying, for how long, and for what. It’s got a similar design across companies too.

I believe with any contract that involves money over time, the total amount (including any fees) should be clear. I don’t think Adobe has made them clear.

I do note that the contract terms differ country to country so this might be more/less applicable to some. The part you quoted seems more reasonable.
To paraphrase Colbert: Reality has a left-wing bias.
Yes but OP meant the 90% of people would get access to opportunities like the millionaires today.

So even if inequality would be wild, nobody would worry about “issues of the poor”, like food or healthcare bills.
> they have a Protestant zealotry associated with their money

To be clear, you are comparing the mindset of new money to the pious protestants who held overwhelming sway over US society for almost two centuries? Just who do you think the old money is?
The irony of the GPL hate, is that without GNU we would just be using the usual UNIX flavours, with everyone taking whatever they felt like from BSD, as it was happening before Linux came into play.

I and others were there, with source available, PD, shareware, beerware, postware and whatever else was available as business friendly license.

I will give it two decades max, for everything to get back to the old way of selling software.
"Heads I Win; Tails You Lose" --Majority Top Executives
Exactly. Even the public transport company in my city has a similar TOS.

If you have an annual subscription and cancel it early, they will charge you the elapsed months accordingly to the monthly fee, not the yearly one and I had to pay 150 Euros for early contract termination.
World population crossed 4B in the 1970s and 5B in the 1980s, now we are about to cross 8B in the next few years. I agree with your point about real estate becoming more heavily securitized, as well as being used as a method to escape capital controls. But, you cant ignore the fact that there are a lot more people both rich and working class competing for those major world city houses than there were 40 or 50 years ago.
Heh....I have a “dedicated machine” (XBox) that connects using an encrypted “tunnel” (SSL) to “a server at another host” (Fortnite) and also employs a “network testing utility” (ping to check latency to find the best game to connect to).

I’d love to see a lawyer rips this contract section to shreds.
The puritans believed it was harmful behaviour because it was the "work of the devil". They were religious zealots. Just as the cancel-culture, wokies are religious zealots.
With the consistency of edit history and stacked time card, I would guess that Mr. Cross is perhaps a few people or maybe an agency of some kind.
Bram Fischer
The Alps system at CSCS will have racks with different processors, to be installed in phases. CSCS has taken delivery of the first racks with AMD EPYC processors, for non-GPU workloads. CSCS will be one of the first customers to get their hands on Grace Hopper, but they will have to wait until 2023.
Ask HN: How to build trust for your Application
Hi everyone,

Does you guys have face a problem that you have launch the product. And users is non-stop questioning is it safe to use? Is it safe to my data?

How can you solve that problem and build trust for users?
Ask HN: How to get better at critical thinking and rational behavior?
I am very interested in how to get better at critical thinking, primarily to have rational behavior. I realize I am a very inconsistent person. I am looking for the hallmarks of rationality that I need to start emulating - which to me is planning and managing lists of things to do.

I think I suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect quite a bit - but it is dramatically harder for me to be aware of it. Instead of imposter syndrome I feel competent 24/7 - and if I don't understand something, that is the fault of the designer of the API or language. How do I get past this? How do I go from being an irrational nitwit, who obsesses about programming languages, to someone who can pick a language and actually master it?

Should I have a smurf account to ask the questions that indicate how stupid I am?

Also, I spend a majority of my time on reddit, browsing r/all, and it's kind of odd considering how much I despise almost everything I read. I am stuck doing that, and I don't know why. I am addicted to browsing news sites - even though I hate politics and think it is a circus to confuse people, and I hate layman writing about science.

Instead of paragraphs commenting on this text - please create a list of the habits you think are most important for being rational. I don't want someone saying "You are suffering from the classic 'Tourniquet of reality'" - I want someone to go "Try to remember that you need your wallet, keys and glasses when you go outside".
https://db-engines.com/en/ranking

I like to check this site every couple months for stats on DB popularity
I think it could be a fairer way of including experts. Text has a way of levelling trolls and experts.
Has anyone tried editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chosen_people within the context of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_writings
This viewpoint is not relevant to or supported by the article. The article describes a Wikipedia editor using his position to oppose labor MP George Galloway and labor leader Jeremy Corbyn. It's hard to see how this is "left based".
The inability to handle simple text is my #1 annoyance. For the rest of them, see jiggawatts's comment
The real pros use butterflies.
Super interesting to read this. Especially how you eventually bridged HTML to React/Vue. Thanks for sharing!

One year ago I had to do something similar and used Web Components (https://www.robinwieruch.de/react-web-components). Did you consider using Web Components or a Web Components library such as lit-html in the first place?
That completly misses the point, first, rich people earnings come mostly from their investments, not their work. Second, the money earned through investment necesarily comes from the work produced by other people and thats completly independent if the rich person works or not.

The person who "earns by investing and working in both nearly equal proportion" doesnt really exist beyond outliers, this is empirical, the 1% owns as much wealth as the entire middle class, this is where their yearly income comes from,they get money because they own stuff, not by being superworkers, otherwise the inequality wouldnt be growing.
The text says that one of the targeted people are Jeremy Corbyn, so in this case your assumtion is wrong
Interestingly, the cofounder of wikipedia, Larry Sanger (who is right wing) rebelled against it and started his own project: https://larrysanger.org/2019/10/introducing-the-encyclospher...

A few of the other people I talk to, like Thomas Greco, also distrust Wikipedia, and they're not exactly right wing, though they are against big government.
I was not acutely aware of this, but is a perfect example of what will happen in severe crisis scenarios: countries will ensure their own survival over others'.
The problem is not the pricing break for a longer contract, but that the yearly contract was promoted as a monthly price (with no minimum fee clearly shown). I'm sure the A/B testing showed higher takeup if they wrote it that way -- it seems cheaper!

It isn't true that this is the only option. Instead of onerous lock-in like a gym membership they could have a sliding scale -- the longer you pay for it, the cheaper it gets. Their decision to go for annual lock-in is short term thinking.
Read through half of it and forgot the part of zig, thought I was reading about a personal experience of game engine programming.
> You're getting lots of replies from (I presume) Americans, who are used to much scammier business behavior than what I know from Germany and you describe in Australia.

Berlin‘s public transport company has the exact condition in their terms of service.

> https://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/streit-ueber-monatskarten...

(„ Zudem sei eine Kündigung für Abonnenten unattraktiv, da sich für die schon genutzten Monate nachträglich der Preis erhöhe, hieß es.“)

It‘s definitely not a scam or rip-off, just a case of someone not reading the contract before signing it.
This is possibly one of the most tone-deaf attempts to shill a cryptocurrency I've seen yet. Bravo.
This is a silly proposal, bitcoin could just switch to a new PoW algo within days if not hours if someone did that.
It's even enshrined into law in some states and locales. A few businesses have tried to market themselves as "no-nonsense, no-bullshit" and put the right prices on things, but that's totally illegal in parts of the US.
Seems like an interesting idea, but it’s light on details such as how consensus is actually achieved. Infobombing is a common tactic (sometimes called the Gish Gallop), where one person will spew multiple claims and sources (which are in of themselves quite often wrong), shifting the burden of fighting not only each incorrect point but refuting each citation, usually exhausting the opposition, especially when they are a minority view (see how well transgender topics fare against “moderate” views even on here for example).
FYI: against W policy, it's common for PR firms outside the US to specialize in managing W pages. So if you hear about a non-US page that's heavily biased, somebody is likely paying a PR firm to do that.

It happens in the US, but it's done more quietly to avoid bans. In Europe, you can probably find ads offering to do it, like "SEO and W optimization", etc.
AWS/Azure/Google Certifications Are More Important Than Linux Certs
Is it long and boring? I thought it was just if you declare a CNAME, you can't declare any other types. Full stop.
It's the public (aka the holders of the currency) who get the benefit of tax enforcement, because it causes demand for the currency and so contributes to it having value in the first place.

But there's multiple levels of government and not all of them get to print money; the US federal government does a lot of payments but doesn't give states whatever they want.
I used graphviz, and built a live reload gui for it offline.

But the current releases are marked as malware by virustotal, which I suspect is a false positive but I cannot verify, so I do not use it for now (on windows)
If you can proceed to buy something and not even bother to read the first word of the product name, which is "Annual" -- you can't claim to be cheated.
Pretty much every mainstream economist put the blame for this squarely on the massively increased regulation of the housing market since the 70s causing a massive decrease in the amount of new construction, not wealth itself.
It doesn't on the first page so that's a 9 and it does on the second page after click through so that's a 1.
Of course, if there is no real reason to break the lease. E.g. if you're moving to a different city for work or starting to study.

Further, if something is advertised as XX Eur/mo it's implied it's a month-by-month thing. Situations you described are very very clearly marked as being a contract with a start and an end date as well as a total including any and all fees as well as cancelation terms. You can't hide essential terms deep within a several page legalese document.
Wealth stored as money is already taxed in a way in the form of inflation. I would much rather have a tax system based on consumption of non renewable and finite resources. Primarily that means tax on materials, fossil fuels and land.

Own a lot of land or a big house = pay a lot. Use a lot of fissile fuels = pay a lot. Leave your wealth in the bank and living like a hermit = pay very little. Basically align the tax system with your (or your company's) environmental footprint.
> Paul paints a rosy picture but doesn't mention that incomes for lower and middle-class families have fallen since the 80s.

As per the chart literally included in this piece, middle-income median wealth rose over 10% since 1983 (inflation adjusted).

High-income wealth rose much, much more. But the argument PG et. al. seem to make is that the economic order that drives inequality also drives economic growth overall and for the median person. Granted, China might be a more convincing example of this. Median quality of life in the US has declined in some key areas.
the survival of the fittest is a means by which creatures may evolve from one species to a superior species. The challenge before us now is not how we could evolve further but:

to live together in a society and achieve the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest proportion of the worlds population

this could never be achieved by imitating the survival of the fittest

it happens in nature, it's just the way of the world

your child failed the SAT, so natural selection has taken place and we're feeding her to a pack of hyenas

we are human beings, with consciousness and a unique ability to see things from another person's point of view

the survival of the fittest created species

but what makes a decent society is the responsibility of the fittest
Not to mention illegal to build.
Being used for drugs is pretty legit if you want some drugs.
This statistic is misleading. The U.S. government defines the poverty line based on a 1955 model of spending patterns. It's completely inadequate for modern needs.

The poverty line for a family of four is defined as a household income of $26,200. Any reasonable person knows it's impossible to pay rent and feed and clothe two adults and two kids on less than $2200 a month. Nevermind owning a home, having a car, saving for emergencies or retiring. Yet the U.S. government does not consider that to be poverty. From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_threshold#Cutoff_issue...

> Most experts and the public agree that the official poverty line in the United States is substantially lower than the actual cost of basic needs. In particular, a 2017 Urban Institute study found that 61% of non-elderly adults earning between 100–200% of the poverty line reported at least one material hardship, not significantly different from those below the poverty line. The cause of the discrepancy is believed to be an outdated model of spending patterns based on actual spending in the year 1955; the number and proportion of material needs has risen substantially since then.

The reality is that poverty in the U.S. is increasing. It has been for decades.