skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Making it illegal just makes it that much more profitable to run nodes in difficult to shut down ways, such as a cell phone powered by a solar array running tor and a miner. … The market will provide.

This is wishful thinking: Bitcoin has no value beyond what someone is currently willing to pay for it. If it becomes risky, your options for converting Bitcoin into local currency will shrink correspondingly. Similarly, if you're in a climate where you need to worry about this I would not want to use a cellular node which is so trivially linked to your account and physical location.
The problem is not the exact thing Apple is doing, but the scale they are doing it at. If Ford and Chevy owned every single commercial plot of land on the country and if you wanted to start up a new brand, you are told you just have to buy your own unpopulated island, start a civilization, convince people to move over, and then you can open a new store selling your own product. That would be where Apple and Google sit right now.
A lot of people haven't worked with socks beyond the level of Winsock.
None of the Apache PLC4X users asking for free support on behalf of their companies mentioned the company name nor used a company email address. I expect it would be pretty easy to keep the gratis support requests and GPL violations fairly separate.
Agnes Callard Interviews Bryan Caplan on the Case Against Education [video]
Yep. Close to median death rate. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
I'd like to remind the HN community, some of whom are rather quick to defend the corporate matrix, that fossil fuel companies saw this coming in the 70s and covered it up.

And they had broad, deep-pocketed support.

Government subsidized them, and protected them after their oil spills.

Media ran Exxon and Chevron's greenwashing ads,

Police beat up protesters, going so far as to infiltrate their groups, seduce their leaders, and have entire fake marriages with them all to keep tabs on them.

Judges sent those protesters to jail - Steven Donziger ought to be a household name, for a recent example.

The military invaded countries illegally for them.

And not a single comment here so far as I can tell is putting any of them on the hook for this ongoing atrocity.
Answer on the 5th figure on this page.

https://tritonstation.com/2022/01/10/the-curious-case-of-agc...
30% is assholeish, no doubt
30% seems to imply that Apple somehow brings 1/3 of the value, simply by not allowing you to sell anywhere outside of the marketplace. It's extreme lockin.
The answer is simple. Uber, Lyft, and everyone else, should have different pricing on Android and iPhone.

For something that costs $10 on Android, charge $13 for iPhone.

This is a win-win solution. The app companies get more money and Apple gets positioning as a premium brand.
Just so long as you're already on top, it's a huge win.

For anyone who isn't, it's a huge loss or at the very least, a huge widening of the gap.
1. Match by type name:

Merge the concept of type and variable (name) in simple functions:

To assign a photo to a contact:
contact.image = photo

Here both photo and contact act as matching types and as variable identifiers.

2. 'that' lambda filter

files that exist =>

files.each.filter(it.exist) or

files.each.filter(file=>{file.exist})

3. of keyword : reverse properties
title of book => book.title

4. indexing with '#'

Colors = [red, green, blue]
Color#1 is red

(zero based indexing can still be done via [] if desired

5. universal in-place assignment

Each operator automatically works with assignment: x ⊛= b is always a shorthand for x = x ⊛ b.

6. universal broadcasting

All functions are automatically broadcasting on lists and pair values:

square number := number * number
square [1 2 3] == [1 4 9]

https://github.com/pannous/wasp/wiki/inventions
San Francisco! Just sent over a ping!
Thanks for looking into it. I see others (dmitriid) have uploaded screenshots already, so I won't duplicate.

But yes, otherwise the article itself was insightful and thank you for sharing your findings.
I am glad it worked for your girlfriend.

One should still not simply walk into a Favela as a tourist. I have family in Brazil (Sao Paulo) and a majority had different experiences even when being careful.

Regarding "Not wasting time and money", it goes quick. A guy on a motorbike with a gun, a car that stops and 3 people jump you etc.

I love Brazil, the people, the music, the landscape, the farova, but criminality is a problem (more then 50 000 homicides per year).
Opinions/commentary on such things tend to focus on some detail, and judge it right or wrong. Is forced use of Apple's payment processor OK? Would X be ok if Apple provided some way of installing externally to the app store? Would 15% be OK.

I think these lines of thought miss the point. This discussion demonstrates, IMO, the mentality & reality of bigness/monopoly.

Mentality-wise, Sheree & Lindsey are expressing something more akin to "We feel that Apple is entitled to a 30% cut of this" than a business idea. Second it's obviously more about power than anything else. The "window of opportunity to set a precedent and claim this cut" is the reality.

Whether or not Apple adds value that reflects or justifies the revenue is irrelevant. That's not how they are making the revenue either way.

They get a big cut of Google's ad revenue on iphones via their default search deal. This is about getting a cut of ecommerce & such. Smaller developers are entirely exposed to their whims. It's too much power, and they are abusing it.

There are two levels to monopolism. One is simple prices. You own the only highway to MetroX. You charge truck drivers a high toll. They have to pay it, if they want to truck at all. The second level is when the highway owner wants a cut of all goods sold in MetroX stores. That's what's happening hered.
Depends on what you mean by "originated" and "trusted". As an example I'd advice against shopping for Huawei phones running 'HarmonyOS' while on holiday in Mainland China. But you probably already know this.
But also because Good Small Corp D and Good Small Corp E would have to follow the same rules.
> I don't, for a minute, think that the 30% would not be paid by the end-user if Evil Corp A was not in play. B and C would just raise prices.

That's what I hint at with "basic economic theory". Evil Corp X wants maximal returns and there is a price point at which they get maximal returns. They can't just raise prices infinitely, because nobody will buy the service. If a middleman takes a cut then that optimal price point moves. Explaining it as the cut being shifted onto the consumer is too simplistic of a model. A part of the cut is shifted onto the consumer and the rest is lost by Evil Corp B, to maximise their total revenue.
Except there are alternatives for all of these, you just have to use a different operating system.

Interoperability has never been legally mandated in the past, but for most of history it has just "happened" because people could get around hostile designs (IBM PC clones anyone?).

The problem with the complexity of today's technology is that, it's no longer feasible for an upstart to make a "compatible" device. You can't engineer an "iOS capable" non Apple device or an Apple-compatible non-Apple OS, not because it is not legal but because it is not feasible technologically. There are ways to do legally clean reverse engineering (ReactOS anyone?) but you cannot get around chip level signature checks nor can you fab your own state-of-the-art chips.
> I think the biggest problem with HomeKit is that for most people the primary UI for their smart home is a connected speaker

Is it though ?

Using voice commands feels more like a gimmick to me. The only time I ever use it is when I demo it a visitor ("look, I can control my house using my voice") but in reality I never use it. If I want to control something manually I just use a wall-mounted button or my phone/iPad. But mostly I don't control things at all, the whole point of all this 'smart' stuff is to automate things. If I have to manually operate something, I consider that a bug and try to fix it.
> In other places, there does exist a "rule of law" that limits such abuses to a significant degree.

Yes — my original point was that this is what will protect you and that's what you want to focus on strengthening. If you don't have a reasonable civil society, technology is unlikely to help and the various ways to get it wrong mean that there's a substantial risk of false confidence.
How did this work out for you? Super curious about how your experience went in practice.
This is a romanticised view that is not really true. Particularly this bit:

>If you are part of the community and stay in line you can actually be pretty safe.
true. in general I would agree any party taking a 30% cut (whether app store or play store or whatever) would be the supreme evil. but since all three parties involved in this instance are of the same caliber, I don't care, and I choose to use none of them.
FAANG targets global audience, German companies target primarily Germany/Switzerland/Austria
I'm guessing the page cache for hot data?
Apple subscriptions provide me an extremely valuable service. They are easy to track, cancel & pay for. To the point I will not use an a subscription on my phone that doesn’t go through their mechanism.

Is that valuable enough to charge 30%? I don’t know but it’s certainly not outside what seems reasonable by orders of magnitude to me.

I’m sympathetic to the argument that they are a monopoly and should be forced to allow alternate app stores or payment processors but it’s not what they are charging that puts me over the line.
Some middlemen are completely useless, others play a critical and necessary role in providing access to a product, and there is a whole spectrum in between.

There is some reasonable cost involved in sourcing food from different countries reliably, regularly, in quantity into your local supermarket. Sure they take a profit, but they invested in infrastructure and employ people to put it all together, without which you wouldn't have a good selection of affordable food... They add a tangible value, and in fact effectively reduce the cost of the end product through scale (it's more cost efficient to deliver a million oranges over a long distance than single oranges in a disorganised manner).

Apple are not part of this equation, without Apple it would still exist, it might only be slighly less convenient to pay and select via a native app.

In short, Apple is an artificial middleman... they are at the extreme end of the useless scale, the rent seekers with an outrageous markup. They are not part of the chain of people involved in delivering food or picking up passengers, they are at most a transaction fee handler, and even then they are forcibly a transaction handler. Everything about it is artificial.
That's a much larger screen than the largest iPhone. Hence why I specified mobile.
Speaking as a homeowner, an increase in home value does nothing for me.

I plan on living in this house until I croak. If I do happen to move for whatever reason, the increased value doesn't help since likely, ALL houses have gone up. My $300K house being worth $600K doesn't really help when the house I'll need to buy is also now $600K.
If OP answers the phone and puts out one major fire a year that saves the contract, they are worth paying to sit around all year.

The contract with the client is likely 50x their salary, so paying an employee 1/50th to be ready if something goes wrong is very much worth it.

My job is similar. I am paid x and I exist to ensure a contract worth 140x goes well. And it goes well 99% of the time, so I fix the 1%. There is no work at the company that I could complete, but also completely ignore immediately it if I need to work on the main contract.
There is also "weighting" of posts by mods, which dang has mentioned on multiple occasions.
Right, it ends up being a good deal.

And I don't see how censorship resistant becomes a thing. If the government wants to block my participation on the system, then I'm sure it will find a way. If the government can't block participation, then it can take the whole thing down.
There are endless KYC/AML requirements for entities that can transfer or emit USD.

It’s completely reasonable that side loaded applications should not be entitled to use regulated payment services.

Edit: Even Android will not entitle side loaded apps for Google payment processing. Android and iOS are literally identical in this regard.
That’s a good example of self-reinforcing stereotypes or, maybe, correlation without causation.

Apple projects get a big team, launch, and then tend to languish because the team moved on to the next thing. “Business types” have little to do with it: as far as we can tell, more or less nothing is happening. That’s not the outcome of a bad strategy, which tends more towards lots of activity with little usefulness.

The possible correlation could come from the fact that when development is more or less suspended, the tech people hand over to business because that’s all that is supposed to happen from here on. HomeKit has -art era and customers just like iTunes or the App Store, so it often operates like an ongoing business rather than a software project.

There have also been several instances of projects languishing where we know tech people were still in control: Scott Forstall alone ran Siri, Maps, the
App Store and iTunes at times where they each saw stagnation at best.
Cloning profiles is what seems likely wrong to me but I'm not sure how that being done via scraping or not should matter.
> Apple execs might have convinced themselves that they are entitled to a huge cut of pretty much everything that goes on an iPhone/iPad/etc.

Why would Apple agree to having its intellectual property being used for free? As long as you have an app on the App Store taking payments, Apple is still entitled to take a commission out of that regardless even if IAP is optional.

Even after the Epic v Apple court case, Apple unfortunately still wins. Don't like it?, Maybe use PWAs or failing that build an alternative. Good luck.
> To everyone else, this just looks like mustachio-twirling, cackling evil and unfathomable greed from a company that’s already the world’s richest and sitting on a mountainous pile of cash.

What’s really interesting to me is that moves like this are the embodiment of the “charge more” mantra that is (or at least was) extremely popular on Hacker News for years. For a long time it felt like every HN thread about pricing or salary negotiation was full of people insisting that you needed to “charge more” in every conceivable situation.

If you made a thing that was producing a lot of money for your clients, you needed to “charge more”! If your customers weren’t complaining and leaving, you needed to “charge more”!

Yet every time a company actually does a “charge more” type move, HN reaches for the pitchforks.

It’s interesting to see how clear-cut this dichotomy is depending on who the reader thinks is being charged more.
Gold digging is way worse [0].

[0]: https://simon.medium.com/bitcoin-and-pollution-the-definitiv...
You state things as absolute fact, while there IS disagreement amongst legitimate experts in these fields.

Please, furnish us with YOUR credentials that allow you to have such unique insights into this field.

Otherwise, you just sound like a crank. I don't know if you're right or wrong, but your unsourced certainty is definitely setting off my bullshit meter.
Be aware that any game on its own will only make you better at that specific game. The brain has enough plasticity to improve at one thing and dull at another. It's better to try different things.
If that is the case, then how do the sparse galaxies described in the article work? In the article, the galaxies described behave aligned with unmodified newtonian dynamics. So if we consider the inverse linear relationship in MOND, then for some reason, that relationship does not occur for these galaxies. That seems like evidence against MOND.

EDIT: Nvm, parent answered similar question here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29914380

Following links it appears that proponents of MOND believe that running the calculations will show that MOND predicts this.
imo the value prop of the App store can be entirely propped up by the $100/year developer subscriptions. They don't even need a profit cut. The app store infra is a joke. You could probably fund it with under $1m/yr
Steam charges 20% to games that sell over $50 million, and 25% over $10 million. Even though those games tend to be bigger and use more bandwidth, they were running into the problem that some of those companies were managing to get bargaining power (Valve announced the change around two days before the launch of the Epic Games store with a 12% cut). Bandwidth isn't actually much of a significant cost.
In Q3 2021 (the latest earnings release), Uber's gross bookings were $23 billion while their revenue was $4.8 billion. I.e. 79% of the bookings were being paid out to the drivers, Uber's cut was 21%. I suspect the drivers are much happier with that than you suggestion of 30%...
Millions of service users use it to interact with perhaps millions of service providers in an app market. That's infrastructure.
>> Language that represent numbers as rationals

so π would be represented as π/1 or τ/2?

Also wouldn't it make comparisons quite expensive?
Dark matter shows up in different ways at different scales. It is not just about galactic rotation curves and MOND has a hard time beyond it.

It hit me one day that the galactic rotation curves had me thinking about it backwards. That had led me to think a galaxy has dark matter in it while more likely the dark matter has a galaxy in it.
Reminder that according to the IPCC there is literally no scenario where the human race is worse off in 2100 than we are now, even if we do nothing about climate change and continue to use fossil fuels.

"Extinction event" narratives are not grounded in reality or backed by the science.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_Socioeconomic_Pathway...
I can’t imagine willingly paying more than 5 percent for the ability to manage these subscriptions.
Maybe I'm just an "academic in charge" but I don't understand how MOND being able to account for galaxy rotation curves means that dark matter is not real. There is missing matter in galaxy clusters. Matter is missing if we look at galaxy-galacy and cluster-galaxy strong and weak gravitational lensing. This matter appears to be non-interacting (see Bullet Cluster, El Gordo, etc). There is missing matter from the angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background if we only account for baryons. There is missing matter if we are to forward model gravitational collapse of large scale structure at early times. MOND doesn't explain any of these things.
So allow for both Apple subscriptions and alternative mechanisms.

Most likely the non-Apple route would be cheaper to the consumer and get 90% of the traffic for that reason alone. If that's the reality, does that not imply that Apple's practices harm most consumers? Seems self evident to me that they do.

Besides, there really should be some common spec/mechanism to manage subscriptions from any vendor.
Clone repo. Click build. Publish to yourself via TestFlight. Never think about it again.
I don’t know how you can miss it, it’s built into Gmail’s interface.
On proof theory in computational complexity: overview
I really think you're conflating the (subjective) expression about an entity being a "major/minor player" with the factual claim of a company having a majority or minority marketshare. They're different, but you're treating them the same. Hence, confusion.

Major Player: an important and successful company, especially when compared with other, smaller companies in the same type of business or industry. Source https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/major-pl...

Ergo, the vast majority of people would agree that Apple is a "major player" in the phone industry despite having a "minority marketshare".

PS. There's nothing wrong with the point you're making, I'm only pointing out that its confusing to others because of the terminology you're using.
> This further reduces git to being just a means to an end: the end being able to just mindlessly push code over a fence and see it magically deployed.

I fail to see how that would be a bad thing?
Most GPL projects aim for a diverse copyright holder base, with the code solely licensed under the GPL, so that no one entity can escape their GPL obligations by paying money. In that scenario it becomes harder to enforce the GPL, unless you have a principled copyright holder base with deep pockets. Hopefully the Software Freedom Conservancy lawsuit mentioned upthread will change that, they aim to set the precedent that anyone who receives GPL violating binaries can file GPL violation lawsuits.
> Isn't there a process of reducing it to only what one needs?

One such process is what you're commenting on here in this thread.
If they allowed 3rd party app stores or let users install apps directly on their phone, sure. But why should Apple get 30% of a subscription between me and a company?

You could almost argue that it's worth 30% for the initial discovery in their app store (meh), but I just don't get how anyone could think it's fair for Apple to take 30% of a subscription, when developers don't have a choice but to use the platform.
Apart from being entirely unearned and unfair, these 30% cuts incentivize platforms to not weed out scams and bad actors.

There are an infinite supply of bullshit apps that have been scamming people with subscriptions that are impossible to cancel. Apple/Google both just send out lip service.
Correct.

I myself wrote a webserver, albeit a specialised one and for curiosity, I also created a few pages which were in no way accessible unless you knew its web address, there were no links to these pages from the home page or anything, I didn't even tell anyone about these webpages and yet in my logs, I could see those webpages were being spidered!

My robots.txt was setup as an instruction to proceed no further, so I think there is other feedback mechanisms guiding the spiders but I havent worked out if its from the web browser, or actual infrastructure like switches or routers.

Admittedly this was before HTTPS became common.
The issue is the policy makers / department of justices entire focus seems to be on fighting so that companies can make more money and/or scam users by getting outside of app store polices.

Why this level of DOJ involvement against apple (with very little CONSUMER harm) when your grandma is LITERALLY getting scammed by fake tech support etc and they do jake crap over any of that.

Millions of consumers get screwed over, in big ways and small, day in and day out. Crickets.

Apple creates a small ecosystem that is completely optional for consumers to use that does a few things right (little tracking, fights all these companies on everything from tracking to trial periods to cancellations and more). And now that is a crime. The App store is the LEAST of my consumer protection worries.

Most of the "alliance" of folks fighting apple run scammy business. Loot boxes for kids (Epic/Fornighte type folks) / Zynga / Facebook data exploiters / Match.com fake profile type players / NY Times impossible to cancel people.
Are we talking about phones or operating systems? Apple has decent market share of course but there are other companies out there. You can buy a Pixel, or any number of other phones.

And even so, many of these “issues” are not problems on Android right? You can use 3rd-party app stores and so forth right?

I’d also suggest.. why does the scale issue matter? I prefer that Apple enforces Apple Pay. I prefer that Apple enforced Sign In with Apple. That’s why I buy an iPhone. If those things bothered me I’d buy something else.