skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
reinforce through different forms. reading something means you remember reading it. writing it means you remember writing it AND remember reading it, because you read it as you write. same goes for hearing someone else speak versus saying it out loud yourself. with multiple sources of input, once is enough for me generally, rather than repeating the same input type multiple times.
I'm sure Epic included this in the legal costs of the case. If they get to create their own store they can potentially make billions.
have you considered that if all we’d done was immediate quarantine the aged and infirm (with generously compensated volunteer caretakers), recommend indoor distancing, and perhaps recommend masks in homes, we’d likely be at a similar and possibly lower level, that all the “measures” were not about reducing spread but rather prolonging the time that the mediopolitical machine had to take advantage of the fear and uncertainty they continually manufacture?
Thanks for the advice! This sounds very much like the sort of thing I'm looking for.
And de facto suicide missions were totally a thing in event of a 1950s-70s nuclear war. B-52s didn't have enough fuel to get home after delivering their payloads. Best they could hope for was to reach neutral territory before they had to bail out. Neither did RAF Bomber Command's V-Force. But the V-Force married officers' quarters were alongside the runways, so if they had to scramble, there was probably nothing and nobody to come home to ...
It's just an example. There are lots more doctors who will give exemptions just to make parents happy. There is clearly friction between parents/doctors/state over this policy.
No thank you, once is enough.
Open standards breed innovation in particular. However, competition also begets innovation, and likewise, innovation begets innovation.

RAM and battery consumption for one. I would rather use a browser "that keeps getting more and more behind" if it means my battery usage is significantly better on a laptop or 2-in-1.

Web browsers are a surprisingly complex topic. For example, WebKit on iOS is intentionally crippled so that PWAs can't use push notifications, and thus businesses are forced to write apps for the App Store. However, Apple has been telling businesses for years now that their app could otherwise be achieved in a PWA, and regardless of kicking and screaming with an appeal due to needing to use push notifications, they will still reject it.

Is that wrong? Of course. Would everything using Blink or building on top of Chromium solve this? Potentially, but as we all know, Apple doesn't follow standards to the letter.

I do agree with where you're coming from though, and I do agree that standardization would be nice, but the reality is more complex, and there's objective advantages and disadvantages to each, the importance of each being a variable dependent on the user.
whether or not the "scaling effect" is the same is irrelevant to whether or not the vaccine provides a societal benefit, which it does

whether or not society must continue to pay an ongoing price for mitigations is irrelevant to whether or not the vaccine provides a societal benefit, which it does

whether or not society can move on after a one-time vaccine cost is irrelevant to whether or not the vaccine provides a societal benefit, which it does

the goalposts were set at "provides a societal benefit", which it does
NIH Documents Provide New Evidence US Funded Gain-of-Function Research in Wuhan
Indeed. I believe this is why Biden's approach came after long deliberation. Civil liberties are not something to be trifle with, and this has to be balanced with the government's reason to exist (as per the Constitution preamble, ensure the general welfare).
Imagine a future employer bringing up how many times you snored last night.
Stolen from Reddit:
A slight correction: the fixed phrase in German is
"Lieber ein Ende mit Schrecken als ein Schrecken ohne Ende",
which translates as

"Better a horrifying ending than a horror without end"
I knew more people that died from COVID in 2020 than in car crashes combined all of my life.
Nothing, as long as it's a low voltage capacitor. Do it to a filter cap in a power supply and you'll have a huge spark and probably damage your screwdriver. Best practice if you're working with large capacitors is to discharge it (safely, using the tool I described), and confirm it worked using a voltmeter.

I learned dealing with 600V monster filter capacitors in vacuum tube power supplies, they'll happily vaporize a screwdriver and knock you off your feet in the process.
This is what happens when you delete Hoover Beaver.
I understand what you are hinting at, but it's not just the quote, the commenter I replied to wrote:

> we may end up in the same situation for education, where becoming an indentured servant for Amazon or Starbucks takes the place of what should be a public education service.

Where "indentured servitudes" means "a form of labor in which a person is contracted to work without salary for a specific number of years". Yes there is a difference with actual slavery, but this is still very much the parallel he was drawing.

Ergo I feel very comfortable saying that this is a very out-of-touch comparison.
The number of comments here that fall back on some sort of a slippery slope argument, based in a worry about government overreach, is really disheartening. If COVID has proven anything in the US, it's how little control the federal government actually has. They've barely been able to enforce mask mandates.

The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water here. I think we can look at the facts - 700,000 people dead, hospitals overwhelmed, countless people injured or disabled from COVID, and no end in sight - and decide that a strong mandate makes sense here, and that a mandate won't make sense in future cases.

The "government is always bad, personal choice should always win" mindset runs deep in this country unfortunately, and from what I can see, it's often based in nothing other than veiled conservatism and a preference for division and anti-cooperativeness.

Above all else, this sentiment holds very little water when it's coming from people who speak out against a vaccine mandate but choose to stay quiet on things like abortion rights.
The law is not software.

"Apple must allow the use of third party payment processors" does not mean "Apple cannot enforce any other rules against apps using third party payment processors". If they decide to go on a harassment campaign of petty violations against third party payment using apps or put undue requirements on them, those parties can complain to the courts and likely succeed. If the third party payment provider is stealing credit cards or obviously malicious behavior in some other area, Apple would likely prevail when pointing to that as the reason they banned them.
> Adding my card information to 50 different in-app wallets does not sound appealing to me, despite the win for consumers and developers.

Apple will probably pivot quickly to allowing you to use Apple Pay for this. A small commission and metadata is better than nothing at all.
Fortnite will come and go but Unreal Engine will be generating revenues forever.

Epic are more motivated by transferring the excess profits of Apple into modest profits for developers, who then redistribute 5% of their revenues (as part of the Unreal Engine license) back to Epic.

I wonder if Epic will sue Steam and console developers next...

Epic sells Unreal to Sony and Microsoft, so suing them is probably unlikely. But Valve could definitely be the next target.
If Apple were a minor player, would the things you describe still be anti-competitive?
The author doesn't seem to go into why travel-planning software is not successful, except for that it isn't discoverable since people only use it once in a while. I think the same can be said for a lot of services, like handymen (Angie's List)

One other reason is I think that travel planning is hard. Getting multiple people to agree on a destination, hotel, fares etc is all hard work. So most people only plan things with people whom they're familiar with, like close friends and family. If there's already a communication channel open like texting or Whatsapp etc it makes no sense to introduce more friction by having travel discussion go through a different channel. I remember an app for couple communication, Between. It had a similar problem. Why add another communication channel?
It's possible but it will be hard to get away. If there's an official policy to do it, there might be whistleblowers or people might notice patterns. If that happens, courts tend to take a very dim view of what they see as intentional retaliation or creative workarounds to not follow the court orders. The court might first tell Tim Cook to appear in court to answer what exactly happened and who decided to do it.
Uh, didn't it always seem like Epic was itching for a fight no matter what happened? That's the impression I got from the case but I also didn't follow it super closely.
> if they provide the best experience to end users

I don't think they can. Their DNA on this evolved as a monopoly. They won't be able to compete, they will be slow and boring while clever people will overpower them.
I thought it was going to be another article about Quaternions.
The problem is that any important action on climate change triggers immediately some linked social issue. from coal miners, to Amazon rainforest logging, to people resisting wind turbines in their backyard, you name it.

These frictions are not trivial to resolve. The bigger issue we face is how to invent functioning (problem solving) politics, both within and between countries
BTW, last I heard, Dave Abrahams, leader of the Swift std lib project had moved on to Google.
U.S. judge in 'Fortnite' case strikes down Apple's in-app payment restrictions
It would be hilarious if the end result was iOS users no longer being as valuable to app developers, if the ecosystem just starts to feel sketchy and people stop spending as freely on it. I don’t think it’s likely, but it feels plausible enough to lol at the idea.
Actually birch leaves have nourishment value close potatoes to 400 kcal/100 grams as I recall. And lots of vitamin C. But they taste very bad. We tested that too, with prolonged boiling and Tabasco, birch leaves are at least semi-edible.

This scene we were presented was a wasteland, no farmers left. The purpose of this operation was too keep the wasteland wasted. Some Estonian "Forest Brothers" survived 40 years to see their country free again. That was the doctrine at that time.
It's not about you dying. It's about you catching it, passing it to someone who might need to be hospitalised and fucking up the whole healthcare system.

Stop thinking with your ego.
Spaghetti Served at CERN
> and it could still be used

But it's not guaranteed to be, which is a huge loss for the app store IMO.
> Dr. Hanssen’s survey is also severely flawed and ultimately unreliable. First, he reports that 30-
43% of respondents “regularly” use a Microsoft Windows phone even though Microsoft had 0% market share in smartphones in 2018 and no longer sells phones.

Apple with their completely truthful experts here.
Fun fact. When Garry posted this, I immediately sent him the pitch doc for my company's travel planning app, which I was convinced had cracked the code and overcome the issue he'd written about. Surprise surprise, we hadn't. And 9 years on, neither has anyone else, perhaps apart from players that were already big in travel then like Tripadvisor, and Google, which has the scale to succeed at anything if it makes them money, which travel does given how deeply they can insert themselves into the transaction path.
Sure. However the thread is about Islamic prayer.
The judge literally hinted at this exact outcome during the hearings, back in May:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-12/epic-appl....

It's not a surprising outcome whatsoever if you followed the trial.

Apple's recent concession on this was reading the room and realising this is the likely outcome.
CRAM bullets cost cheaper than your drone, and those CRAMs are on each Destroyer. I think our cruisers have 2 CRAMs on them (but I forget exactly)

These CRAMs can aim-bot and destroy subsonic cruise missiles (500mph), and even supersonic cruise missiles (1000mph). That's why China has spent billions developing hypersonic missiles (2500+mph) to dodge our CRAMs and missile defenses.

How fast is your drone flying? Does it pull enough lateral Gs to dodge CRAM shots or avoid the Patriot defense missiles?

--------

https://youtu.be/0bmSCC823tM?t=205

The "city-version" has shorter range, because we need the bullets to self-destroy themselves before they land on someone's property. So the Israeli "Iron Dome" is in fact, inferior, to the defense system on these Destroyers / Cruisers that surround the Carrier.

Tel Aviv's Iron Dome also has a much more difficult job: defending a population center rather than just a few ships. There will naturally be "holes" in the Iron Dome (just areas of the city that aren't as well defended).

In contrast: we can position our ships to maximize the chance of interception, and minimize the chance of our CRAM's failing.

-----------------

The worry about China's drones is their stealth spydrones which will try to triangulate the position of the carrier strike group. The drone then sends the coordinates to a hypersonic missile.

I'm not convinced that the stealth systems on those drones are sufficient to "hide" from radar, probably only good enough to prevent things like CRAM/Patriots from locking on. Without the ability to lock on, we don't have an ability to kill those drones from Destroyers / Cruisers.

That's where the Carrier comes in. The E2 Hawkeye has an aerial radar system and can get "eyes in the sky", making our targeting superior (maybe then our Patriots can hit). We can also launch fighters (F22 is probably sufficient) to close the distance and lock on / destroy the target... or even engage in a dogfight (radar-drones wouldn't have much dogfighting ability).

--------

How is China launching a million drones anyway? Their carriers aren't like ours. We have 4x catapults and 2x runways per carrier, I'm pretty sure China's carriers are only 1x runway. How many minutes does it take per launch?

If its an air battle you want, the 4x catapults + 2x runways the Supercarriers push will get more planes into the air than anything in the Chinese Navy... and we have something like 10 carriers fielded right now.
Containers Don't Solve Everything
You may also be missing the fact that many other countries weren’t designed around needing a car. Chances are, if you can’t afford a fine in the first place, losing access to driving will guarantee that you cannot work, making it less likely you can afford to pay the fine. It’s the escalation that’s the problem, but also indicative of the punitive nature of laws weighted against underclasses. Any law with a fixed rate fine is essentially a law that “only exists” for the poor.

You may be right that this is a world wide problem, and I’m only imagining places that don’t punish the poor so harshly. That said, I saw an article recently that gives me hope. It was a jurisdiction in the US where police handed out gift cards to some auto parts store instead of citations when pulling over vehicles for faulty equipment. While the cynic in me thinks this is just a play by the auto parts store to grow it’s market, I like to think it’ll provide good data to drive policy.
> how am I supposed to trust 50 different gateways?

Do you not buy things online currently? Do you not use Amazon, or Lyft, or Netflix, or Spotify?
You'd be surprised. At my employer, I'm told before every meeting with internal and external auditors to not offer unrelated information to them.

Basically, give them only what they ask for and exactly what they ask for.

If no one sees something, it doesn't exist, right?
The lawsuit was filed in August of last year, and arguments in court spanned most of May (and were conducted in-person, not virtually), and then the judge issued her decision today. That's not exactly lightning quick.

The rate at which court cases proceed really depends a lot on the complexity of the case, the length of the discovery phase, etc. Both Apple and Epic didn't want to have a jury trial, so there also wasn't the matter of empaneling a jury.
Calculating Mill Level Deforestation and Carbon Risk in the Palm Supply Chain
80% of adults is misleading because it excludes children who can still get the virus and spread it to others

tbh the concept of herd immunity doesn't care about who the law says can get vaccinated
> The graph shows that those low p-values are more likely to be in papers

This is an important distinction, in my experience [0].

Many papers will report a p-value only if it is below a significance threshold, otherwise they will report "n.s." (no statistic) or will give a range (e.g. p > .1). This just means that in addition to pressure to shelve insignificant results, publication bias also manifests as a tendency to emphasize and carefully report significant findings, while mentioning in passing those that don't meet whatever threshold.

[0] I happen to be working on a meta-analysis of psychology and public health papers at the moment. One paper that we're reviewing constructs 32 separate statistical models, reports that many of the results are not significant, and then discusses the significant results at length.
CMS Comparison
I know contentful is more popular but i've been hearing that Agility is actually a lot more user friendly?
> More choice is always a win for the customers.

It's sometimes a win for customers.

[EDIT] trivial and clear illustrative case that should be easy to apply to murkier situations: a regulation that bans known poisons in food reduces choice.

[EDIT EDIT] more relevantly, and a bit tangentially to the example above: thanks to coordination problems it's possible for more-desirable states to be unmaintainable without reduction of choice—it's possible for someone's—even everyone's—favorite outcome to require a reduction of choice, and for that option to cease to be when more degrees of freedom are introduced.
There are really two problems that could go under the name of "fixing software security":

(1) How do you improve the state of the art, so that, if a company is serious about security, they can succeed?

(2) How do you fix the way companies are run so that they actually even try to take security seriously?

Both are big contributors to the overall problem.

I do think there is room for improvement in #1, so it's something we should be looking at. But we could get a lot of mileage out of #2 even if there were no way to move the needle on #1.
With regards to the slippery slope argument, Bill Burr has the response when someone asks where it stops (pardon the quoted French):

> F**g Somewhere!
Andrew Huber man had a really interesting podcast about this. He cites an academic paper for basically every statement he makes on the podcast. What I remember from the learning and memory podcast was that repetition matters, especially for older people and it has to be the right kind of repetition. And also stakes matter. You learn much faster when there are real stakes involved.
My reading of this is that it's nowhere near the big deal people are making out in the comments here. According to CNBC's report "Apple will no longer be allowed to prohibit developers from providing links or other communications that direct users away from Apple in-app purchasing" [0]. That's a long way from forcing Apple to allow alternative IAP providers or installing alternate app stores. It suggests you'll have to step out of the app to make a payment (which adds friction) and it'll be up to the app developer to validate back in the app that the right person has made the right payment. This sounds similar to what Apple had already conceded they'd do [1]

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/10/epic-games-v-apple-judge-rea...

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/aug/27/apple-agr...
99% on average. Does not take into account individual circumstances. And viral shedding loads and exposure time change that significantly.

Plus with a diverse workforce who knows who might be taking care of an immune compromised person at home they might simply carry it to.

Then there’s long Covid as others mentioned.
Disagree if Apple is willfully mistreating people who it knows have zero days on them and want to work with them on fair terms, and then those zero days end up in the wrong hands, I place the blame SQUARLEY on Apple. I'm not going to victim blame a security researcher trying to put food on the table or provide for their family for what Apple forced their hand to do.

simply put if Apple doesn't find a way to come to an agreement with this person in a timely manner, they are just saying they see the zero day and the consequences for their users as acceptable losses as preferable to the payment
It can be done correctly without lives lost. See Islamic nations for their entire existence pre Sykes Picot
Been using this for some time now, after my Blokada became unstable and Netguard wanted money for blocklists. TrackerControl does the job well with a reasonable interface for making exceptions. They could be a bit more fine grained and I don't always agree with the categories but that's acceptable. Every once in a while the app crashes in the background and blocks all traffic, but less often than Blokada.
Interesting.

Source? And is it reversible?
> OTOH, nuclear war might halt the climate crisis, over-population, etc.

Well when everyone's dead or starving for sure your first world problems will fade away.
In many platforms it's not worth the effort, or the native payment method is actually cheaper than any potential competitor
Nation states was more of an example. "Anyone that isn't in the public eye" is what I should have said.
Building a reliable and tRUSTworthy web service
Wow this is unexpected, until now Apple had a solid case, or so I thought. This is welcome of course, since it means other developers can use that judgement AGAINST Apple. Was it worth it for Apple to go to court all things considered? I guess they were really confident the court would rule in their favor.
I think the mortality rate for teens and adults was something like 3-4 times higher than today. People also lived through epidemics that would cull 5-10% of the population every 20-30 years.

Also my grandmother mentioned that when she was young girl just a 100 years ago old people were absolutely broken. Today a lot of people spend their sixties and seventies in very good health.

Also I remember reading about grave site on a bluff in California that was eroding away. Contained the graves of sailors that died when a ship sank in the 1880's. Before reburying them higher up on the bluff they looked over their bones. They weren't in very good health despite being in their 20-40s.
Apple ordered to change how it handles App Store payments
The ICUs are filling up and people who just need a kidney transplant are dying. That is with just a small fraction of the population actually getting infected. The hospitalizations are also resource intensive and require an ICU bed for 2 or 3 weeks. This isn't just a "bad flu virus". Once around ~10,000 people get infected in a week that's enough to knock over a metropolitan hospital system sending hundreds of people into the hospital.