skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m paying how much to buy a phone from Apple, and then they also want to get paid every time I install something whether they’re involved or not? It’s none of their business what I want to do.
And adds substantially to the cost of compliance; one suspects. Dealing with a regulator is not a cheap process; there are a lot of lawyers involved.
One suggestion is I'd like to be able to move back and forth between guessing individual letters, like starting with the 4th for example rather than the first. Because it's easier to try some letters you know are close and then guess the further ones.
I couldn't agree more. Yes there is some utility to things like Electronc and React Native. They are great for small startups that don't have the money to hire a team for each platform. Or they just need to get something that they can demo to investors. But really when it comes down to it, they should take some money and hire some people that can write the app natively.
It’s more than a bit difficult to talk about films in terms of pixel resolution, but for example I used to shoot a lot of FP4, a fairly but not exceptionally fine grain black and white film, and in 35mm (actual film gate 24mm x 36mm) I’ve seen that stock estimated at around 25 Megapixels equivalent, which works out to 0.0289 Mp/mm^2, or about 1,492 Megapixels for an 8” tall x 10” wide negative… assuming square pixels that’d get you around 43K horizontal resolution.

That’s if my very tired brain is getting the math right. The perceived resolution would basically melt the mind… if you’ve ever looked at a 35mm frame blown up to 8x10 side by side with an 8x10 contact print under a loupe, it’s just incomparable.
But it's an extension, if I understand correctly.
> Apple could view an iPad Pro as needing USB-C ports

The iPad Air as well as the plain old iPad had also gotten standard USB C ports with zero restrictions before this particular conspiracy theory became popular.
It’s a fuzzy heuristic, and if you set the tolerance low enough, it works. I’ve done it before for exactly this purpose.
It's a bit confusing, but often when a government agency issues a statement about something being "not recommended" it is intended to mean the government is not strongly encouraging people to do [whatever]. This is very different from the government recommending against people doing [whatever]. So here the CDC is basically saying we don't say people over 26 should definitely get an HPV vaccination, but we don't say they shouldn't either.
That's wild. I think we will eventually hear more of the story.
You might remember the release of D3 with rose-tinted glasses ?

Between the server issues (for a mostly singleplayer game!), the real money auction house, criticisms about the story and the visual palette, as well as a missing PvP mode, it had a LOT of criticism.

Meanwhile D4 somehow actually managed the feat of mostly stable release servers (though the online-only criticism still stands).

Hardcore dungeon zoomer fans used to current D3/PoE1 might not have been the target demographic here. Probably also why you unlock most skills so quickly (which is probably barely quick enough for most players to see, as 80% of them don't finish the campaign). And I find these complaints hard to believe, as after all, the top end playstyles still tend to be much faster, and different from early on thanks to how the paragon points and especially legendary aspects and finally unique items tend to transform the skills.

I found the last open beta of D4 so compelling (even more than the D3 beta) that I completely changed my mind about (not) buying it. They really nailed (again) that "Diablo feel" (whatever that is) that I have been missing in competitors'. I have also been surprised how well the dodge mechanic worked and how enjoyable it was. The campaign is good, the art is top notch, as usual.

Now sadly the way that the leveling works in the campaign is screwed up in that it's easy to end up with a too easy game if you start on non-easy mode and start doing even the slightest sidequest (which is a shame as some of them are great !). You would have thought that, after D3's evolution, there would be more than 2 difficulty levels available for the first half of the game ! I also don't understand why the seasonal mechanics have been pushed out of the campaign.

The worst issue IMHO creeps up late game (and even mid-game for the season 2) : item spam, especially for "legendary" items. (Listening too much to the most obsessive fans of the current D3 ??) Even worse, for some unfathomable reason, the legendary aspects don't even have unique icons to distinguish them at a glance in the inventory (ditto for dungeon sigils), which is frankly shocking for what is a Blizzard game with ridddddddddiculously long credits, and not some kind of small budget beta.

But then, just like D3 changed a LOT, I'm cautiously optimistic about D4 improving over the years. (The online-only / no mods issue will remain, and this lack of future is sad to see considering the man years of effort spent on it...)
>>I don't want my phone to be a general purpose computer.

Too late. It already is. Which makes all these restrictions on what you can and can't do with it stupid especially if its gonna sell for an amount of money nearly equal to reasonably spec'ed laptop.
If I'm reading it correctly, it would reduce the 30% fee to 17% unless you only distribute your app on third party app stores.

> Reduced commission — iOS apps on the App Store will pay a reduced commission of either 10 percent (for the vast majority of developers, and subscriptions following their first year) or 17 percent on transactions for digital goods and services.

I'm also not sure what the 10% fee applies to. Apple doesn't charge a fee if you're purchasing physical goods, only digital goods (that's why you can buy a paperback book on the Amazon app but you can't buy a Kindle book on the app). Isn't everything that could be purchased through an in app purchase or subscription a digital good or service?
Apple’s page explicitly mentions “digital goods and services” several times.

https://developer.apple.com/support/apps-using-alternative-p...
I wouldn’t be ok with that, but then I would just not buy it. I wouldn’t try to force them to let me install dmgs by suing them…
Cactus – 6502 Homebrew Computer (2023)
It's also the wrong hand.
But I think the little o looks more like a head in this case.
O7 just looks like a hex code or something.
> If a library has 100k lines of code but the parts you use are only 1k lines of code then why is that worse than a library with 1k lines of code?

There's nothing wrong with not using the whole feature set of some library. But if library A does the same things as library B with a third of the code, isn't that better? (All other things - e.g. perf - being equal)

> That's true right until the moment you do need them and then you need to rewrite a lot of code.

There's plenty of applications that will only ever need a handful of connections. Probably most applications.
I've been working on something in the same vein, though just using manual selections, or selections auto expanding from the visible viewport.

I really like the per-site parsers, which make a lot of sense

Congrats :)
A bill is by definition a proposal.
The vast majority of Windows software doesn't need VS Professional or Enterprise; Community edition works just fine, and still enables you to access the entirety of the platform as a developer. Not to mention numerous alternative development toolchains, use of which doesn't require paying anything to Microsoft.

And then on top of that, Apple already charges developers for tooling via their dev license program. Which at least makes some sense since it's a fixed fee. The notion that maker of the toolchain gets to claim a percentage of what the app written using it brings in is ridiculous by all industry standards.
Fortunately, that is indeed a thing :) several post-processing tools have some sort of gfpgan_strength (searching as-is should yield results on a few repos) param being passed, also it's been a while since diffusion-based restoration methods are equipped to diminish stochasticity enough to produce great results, worth the time as well!
Also noteworthy: https://openmodeldb.info/?t=faces+restoration+texture-genera...
N should just be 0. Why have an app store middle man at all? You could just download your Netflix app from Netflix's website. Problem solved.

When you look up a program on Google search, you pretty much always get the right result. When you search for something on an app store, you get a bunch of spam mixed in. It's a worse experience.
Depends.

If the primary point was to put a man on the moon, the cost of bringing things back is basically free.

If on the other hand the primary mission was bringing back as many rocks as possible, then yes, the return would be very expensive.
There’s a small message contained in that unnecessarily long post - that maybe a popular library used for HTTP in Rust could use less unsafe.

There was no need for this half mocking, half condescending tone. If the author wanted an explanation for a technical decision, they could open an issue and have a conversation like an adult. Instead we’re left with their speculation that leads nowhere. They cry about the existence of some unsafe code, but don’t actually put in the effort to figure out if it can lead to a real problem like unsoundness. And somehow the title implies that they’re saying something profound about the entire rust ecosystem when they just looked at one library. It’s just innuendo, as far as I could tell.

Here’s a post by the maintainer of hyper about what they accomplished in 2023 and what they hope to accomplish in 2024 - https://seanmonstar.com/blog/2023-in-review/

If this work interests you, or you depend on hyper in production like many companies do, then consider sponsoring them! Or maybe you could give back to the commons by submitting PRs that fix issues you’ve found. Or even a good bug report would be appreciated.

But not this kind of article. This article helps no one and does nothing constructive. We all benefit from the work that open source maintainers put in. They have it hard enough without having to read low effort posts trashing their work. Be better.
This is what I threw together: https://github.com/David-OConnor/esp32c3_quickstart

In theory, there is a quickstart CLI tool that should generate a project, but it is currently broken. This is the repo I set up that "just works" for C3.
Underground Cells Make 'Dark Oxygen' Without Light
Seems like Usenet ..
They mentioned during the media briefing that the terrain they were flying in were featureless, which is extremely challenging for it to determine where it's at, and thus it's possible that it misidentified some aspect of the terrain and caused this. Unfortunately because communication was lost when it landed, the flight data was lost, so we will never know for sure what happened.
Apple considered the App Store commission to be compensation for the value delivered by the entire iOS developer ecosystem, not just the mechanical/infrastructure parts of the app distribution process. It was a pretty good setup: aside from the $100/year membership fee, the charges scaled with revenue, which in most cases is a good approximation for the value provided (there were some edge cases where that falls apart, like digital content purchases). Unlike, say Microsoft, they didn't charge $250/seat/year for their full-fat IDE. The also haven't charged licencing fees for the SDK, like is common in the video game space.
Bummer about the rush, lots of good stuff in the article, hopefully you'll get another chance to condense it. Definitely brought back a lot of memories for me, my OS/2 phase was a lot of fun and I was sad when it ended.
Cruise wasn't hiding the pedestrian-dragging video from regulators
As the official “developer”, the nonprofit would also be liable for those apps. I’m not sure that will be practical.
‘Nobody’ is a large assumption. For developers with a consistently small download base, they can switch with little concern.

The consensus here seems to be that Apple don’t want anyone to switch. I’m not sure I fully buy into this, because most developers don’t have the size problem, so switching could be beneficial for them.
The main entrance/exit. It’s a bottle vs pipe situation.
Nobody is forcing you to buy an iPhone.
If they’re like me, they subscribe to those through the various apps from the app store, such that Apple is the processor for them. It means paying more typically, but it’s worth it for me to have as many of my subs as possible in one place, easy to cancel and easy to resubscribe.
Plenty of contracts include dubious and outright illegal things, depending on the jurisdiction. I'd say Apple is violating the public trust as they increasingly corner the market in apps and phones.
If the app/site requires a user to click a verification link before using an email address, how the mail provider handles the local part is irrelevant.

The user can either access the email because they used an address they "own" or they can't.

It also solves a whole bunch of other issues all at once (typos, unsolicited signups, etc).
Greatly exceeded expectations. This little heli has earned its place in space history.
Some kind of commit message is useful. When I'm figuring out which point from this morning I want to roll back to, having them tagged as "blah" or "wtf is this?" helps.

But they're absolutely not worth spending a lot of time on. Write something and move on. I still commit a lot less than I should, and regularly regret not having committed, because I spent 4 years working at a place that required meaningful commit messages and that trained me out of committing early and often. Don't be that guy.

But definitely don't squash on merge. You lose all the advantages of git; you can't pull from other people's branches because their commits are going away, you can't automated bisect because you'll just land on your squashes. If you're going to squash then why even bother using git?
I totally agree with the author's points, however, I can't understand why people run "apps" for things like WhatsApp (and Slack) when they run just fine in a browser tab.
> we live in a free society, where consumers are supposed to be able to decide for themselves what they value, and spend their money accordingly

…except if they value a device that enforces audited software only, because they find it safe and convenient. If they value that they’re wrong, because wanting that is unfair to some businesses who want to sell them things.

> it is better than letting a single for-profit corporation set the terms

This is sort of true, government regulation is better than a single corporation dictating terms. But it’s not that relevant, is it? There are two major corporations in the mobile OS business. Plus a bunch of open source projects and a few small businesses for the adventurous. And web standards making it reasonably possible to not depend on any one of them, if that’s a priority.

Are the big technology companies powerful? Yes. Should they be regulated? Yes. Like this? Probably not.
Writing-a-TUI-in-bash: How to write a TUI in BASH
If whatsapp takes 16 seconds to launch on your mac I'd say the problem is your mac.
And yet native apps consume as much or even more memory than electron because you have to implement memory management manually which could be very difficult for app like WhatsApp.
Air pollution over Alberta oil sands up to 6,300% higher than reported
"The launch of the three spacecraft is planned for 2035, on an Ariane 6 rocket."
Figma to Start Charging Developers for View Access to Designs
> don't prevent you from installing any OS.

That you then can't really do anything with either because of the super limited HW support (due to only using "free" drivers) or because they're so slow you just give up in frustration. Or lack of apps.

At least in the case of the Librem 5 its wildly overpriced for what you actually get (if you ever actually get it that is).
Too many APPs are being built with Electron.

There really just needs to be a cross platform API that renders with native widgets and is easy to link / build against for OSX+, IOS+, Android+, and Windows+. Make the platform open spec and free to implement and Linux / BSD will probably follow on their own.

The do or die is shipping natively, with the OS, on the popular closed platforms. Web browsers are where engineering dollars are already spent to adapt a common API (web tech) to native platform tech and that's why Electron and similar things see traction.
Useless? Come on. Documentation is hard, and I suspect rather than admit something is hard we'd just rather pretend that "it's not important."

> Requiring commit messages is a vestige of engineering practices from the ancient times of the mid-aughts.

I know it's been ~20 years, but hardly ancient. I suppose it's ancient to the young?

> With modern trunk-based engineering, pull request branches are squash-merged onto main — and all those silly commit messages are thrown out in the process.

I do work that way; but those commits are still preserved in git history on the branch I cut the PR from. People have gone back and read them! They've told me as much!

But also worth noting that this is a very github/gitlab-centric workflow; certainly the kernel devs don't work that way.

> You shouldn’t have to show your work like you did in school.

Commit messages aren't for showing your work, they're for explaining why you did what you did at a given point.

---

Honestly, in some ways I kinda see the point. But if you're not disciplined enough to squash your damn commits on your branch and re-write messages as-needed there, I just don't believe you're disciplined enough to write good PR messages. The author alludes to this when talking about how the real good stuff is captured in slack, google docs, etc. (all infinitely less-discoverable, especially as time marches on... but I digress). And if you aren't disciplined to write good PR messages either, then who really cares what your git history looks like at that point.

I work with and have worked with a lot of engineers with this general mindset - "the real information is in a meeting doc" or whatever - and it honestly sucks. Systems are less reliable, work is of poorer quality, lots of unnecessary work gets done, etc. It's a bad way to do engineering, and there's no other way to put it.
So not really open. Still need Apple’s permission and pay their tax to run something on a device you purchased for ~$1000.
While it will be nice to ship hobbyist apps through a third party channel, it will only be a matter of time until app users are bullied into installing third party stores. For the normal user it's less of a "choice" than it is for the technical user. The average user wants to play games on their phone and will submit to any breaches of privacy in order to do so. These average users are the parents, siblings, and children of most technical users. The average app is spyware even on the App Store and I only see it getting worse with these loosened restrictions.

That said the content on the App Store is already pretty bad privacy-wise, this is more of a money issue and whether Apple deserves to get paid for their role as an app channel.
As far as I can tell The Commons Conservancy is not a 501c3 (or Netherlands equivalent), at least from their "organization" page. Not making money != a nonprofit organization.
Had trouble signing up for Digital Ocean, called up their support team, got a really bad response and decided I'll just blacklist them.

If they were giving me trouble during sign up then what hope was there for support afterwards?
Apple needs to invest in making Swift and SwiftUI more cross-plat friendly, otherwise businesses will continue to use the subpar cross-plat technologies that are at hand to ship to their platforms. I don't think this will happen though because they don't care much about the macOS App Store relative to iOS which doesn't have this issue nearly as badly.
> In this test, there’s no contest between BBEdit’s 1 second launch time and WhatsApp’s 16 seconds on a 2021 MacBook Pro.

How is 16 seconds even remotely reasonable?
Yeah, it wouldn't be something that could be entered into without some consideration, but there are already a many, many software projects that are successfully distributed by non-profit organizations, so it certainly is feasible.
Think Like a Git
I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to try to interpret dense legal text. We know what the spirit of the law is and I'm operating under the assumption that (1) EU regulators intended to effect real change, otherwise this discussion (and the regulation itself) is entirely pointless. (2) It's obvious that Apple's proposal makes no difference to the status quo, it just highlights the extent of their anti-competitive position.

Therefore it's reasonable to assume that the regulators will not be happy with the proposal unless (1) is false.
People like to click a dock icon or cmd-tab to an app, instead of having to click a dock icon and then a particular window and then a particular tab, or cmd-tabbing and then clicking to a particular window and then a particular tab.
It certainly has been noticeable. It just gets mentally filed under 'old timey' sound.
You're off by an order of magnitude there.

If 90% of billings were commission-free, that means $110 billion had Apple's commission applied to it. 110 * 0.3 = 33 billion of revenue at most, or 16.5 billion if we use the 15% commission.
Ask HN: Lenovo encouraging Chromebook users to install Linux?
I was surprised to see that Lenovo has a guide to installing the Linux distro of your choosing on a Lenovo Chromebook device. I guess the cynic in me expects that companies want you to use whatever OS is bundled with the hardware rather than encouraging users to use the hardware the way they'd like -- or at least that they wouldn't want to make it easy to overwrite the ChromeOS install by providing a helpful how-to!

Can anyone think of why Lenovo would do this? I would expect that this would potentially draw the ire of Google, but surely Lenovo has thought this through and maybe knows Google doesn't care enough? Just curious if anyone can speak to Lenovo's incentive calculus here

https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/faqs/operating-systems/install-linux-chromebook/

(Ps: the guide is somewhat out of date -- for those curious, this seems the way forward for Chromebook users looking to install a Linux distro of their choosing https://docs.chrultrabook.com/

Seems the galliumos project mentioned in the Lenovo link is now discontinued)
So what happens when a FOSS SDK for iOS pops up, which only calls the APIs on the OS itself and doesn't include any Apple-copyrighted stuff in it? What would you pay Apple for, then?
> The notion that maker of the toolchain gets to claim a percentage of what the app written using it brings in is ridiculous by all industry standards.

Never published a game on a game console, eh?
I would expect muskonauts will make the samples redundant by then.
I disagree with the author.

I see it as, if not for Electron, this app wouldn't have been made for Mac period or it would not have feature parity or it would be more expensive in terms of subscription or one-time buy price.

Choose 2 out of 3: Low price, feature parity, app performance.

For certain types of apps, consumers have chosen low price and feature parity.

I think it's fine for apps like Spotify, Whatsapp, Discord, Teams, etc to use Electron. They're cross platform apps that also require a web version. Electron provides acceptable performance for them.

VSCode is the prime example of having huge success with Electron. It's free. It supports many platforms. It has feature and plugin parity. It even allows very interesting use cases like spinning up private web instances that have all your local settings.

Obviously there are types of apps such as video editing and rendering that should not be Electron apps - and they aren't.