dev_tty01

I suppose. I wonder if one can adjust the engine's skill level.

>Maybe he just wants to brag with his h-index.

Who is going to cite this paper?

It is not HIS garbage. He is involved in numerous companies. Starlink is a product of SpaceX and that is full of thousands of great engineers. To be disinterested in SpaceX technology because of Musk is to be completely dismissive of the amazing accomplishments and effort of those thousands of great engineers. Would you like to have your work dismissed because the head of your company was a bizarre jerk? By any rational measure, SpaceX is NOT producing garbage tech.

Fortunately, since you are dead you don't care how long the trip took.

Yes, that is correct for 10 million installs of a 1 euro app.

(10M-1M).5 + 10M.17 = 6.2M

If you make 10M for a 10 euro app (1M installs), the Apple cut is:

(1M-1M).5 + 10M.17 = 1.7M

The upshot is, if you are selling a 1 euro app, stay on the App Store. If you make it a €1/year subscription, it drops to 15% in the second year.

Everything is in Euros since dollars don't really apply to the discussion, yet...

Hmm, I haven't seen this. But I am curious, how is that dishonest? It sounds like it is explicitly stated, so you know what will happen.

What Apple subscriptions? Logic Pro? Are you talking about a free trial or a paid trial? Also, if it is paid and you cancel and they terminate usage, do you end up seeing a refund for the balance of the time? With third-party devs, they have already sent the money along to the dev so they would have to pull back money to terminate immediately and refund the prorated balance of the subscription cost to the user. That would be hard on devs.

Setting aside whether it is justified or not, Apple is involved. Your app is heavily dependent on Apple built APIs (and hardware). Up till now, developers paid $100/year plus a value based per user royalty that was(is) part of Apple's cut of App Store purchases. Now developers will pay $100/year plus a per user royalty when the user count exceeds 1 million. If the developer stays on the App Store with a free app, there will still not be a per user charge.

Edit: I should have been specific that I was referring to the Core Tech Fee that will apply even to free apps with more than a million users. Developers will still pay a value based royalty of 10% (small devs) or 17% (large devs) for paid apps.

Not sure I understand your response. There is a tremendous amount of launch data from several years of launches (and landings) that demonstrate whatever approach to design and manufacture SpaceX is using results in incredibly robust and capable space systems. I think rather than fear, a better response is to see what can be learned from SpaceX and see if it can be applied elsewhere.

>There has to be a way for the physical owner to have full control over the device. It's not even a matter of inmediate benefit, but rather good consumer/human rights policy.

Really? Do you have "full control" over your TV? Your dishwasher? Your microwave? Your car?

I hear this argument on HN, but I've never met an iPhone customer who complained about not being able to side-load apps. Anecdata to be sure, but Apple's goal is to satisfy customers and therefore sell lots and lots of phones. If there were significant customer demand, Apple would work to satisfy that demand.

I agree with you, but it's not about spouses or elderly parents. I have been designing chips and custom hardware for multiple decades. Guiding and/or implementing custom firmware for a similar time span. I am highly technical and I still want a phone with a tightly controlled ecosystem that is robust and it isn't sending all my personal data back to the mother ship for them to monetize. The App Store is one of the best features of the iPhone. There are a lot of bad players doing all sorts of things. I like having Apple guarding the gates.

The thing is, I think I am similar to the vast majority of Apple's customers in my preference for the App Store. Finding and installing software was a hassle before the store. The simplicity of app management with the store has been a revelation. Some will say that my preference shouldn't keep others from getting side-loading and I get that, but I imagine creating that installation path will also create a new exploit path. I don't think most customers will be happy if Apple has to allow side-loading and that leads to weaker security. Hopefully I'm wrong and weakened security can be avoided, but I'm skeptical for now.

A large segment of the HN readership doesn't seem to understand that many of their desires with respect to a device put them in a small minority of Apple's customers. If Apple is satisfying the vast majority of customers, why is that a bad thing?

Except you didn't pay for a portable computer. You are technically savvy. You knew what you were buying. Now that you own it, you want something different. I don't begrudge you deciding you want something different, I just don't think it is reasonable to imply that you were sold something different than you purchased.

Most, if not all, small indie devs pay 15%. Everyone pays 15% for subscriptions after the first year.

I always thought it was for managers who have trust issues.

I think there are some external factors to consider. Did you convince people to move their families and join your quest? Did you make other commitments to people? If people are dependent on you and you cut and run when things get tough, why should anyone ever trust you again?

The parent comment is about doing something you don't want to do rather than doing something you don't enjoy. Important distinction. You did military service because you wanted to do it. It had real value to you. You did not continue doing something that you did not actually want to do. I would say that was a good decision for you. You didn't enjoy it but you valued it. It is easy to get these conflated.

Search on what you actually said: "insulated crimp terminals ring terminals that work on #10 screws and 12 AWG wire"

That gets a much better result.

Why the questions? It is no one else's business why they want that level of privacy. Is it your intent to convince them that they don't need privacy?

As I said, the Wright's did not use the catapult in 1903. Three years before Dumont's 1906 flight of 60 metres, they flew well over 250 meters without catapult assist at takeoff. In 1904 they also flew over 400 meters without catapult assist. After that flight they started using a weight-powered catapult to simplify takeoffs and speed development.

So yes, it is simple. The Wrights flew without "shooting it out of a device" years before Dumont. The Wright Flyer was also capable of lateral control, like a modern, independent airplane.

Dumont (and all early flyers) used headwinds to increase effective airspeed at takeoff. Does that disqualify him? The Wrights also of course used headwinds and then added catapults to reduce their dependence on ideal headwinds to enable faster progress in a wider range of conditions.

For decades most orbital rockets took off in an easterly direction, effectively using the earth's rotation as a catapult. Does that disqualify them as successful orbital flights?

Sorry to hear about the job losses, but what's a Twitch?

I am being facetious of course, but I honestly haven't heard of anyone using Twitch in quite a while. Maybe I'm just out of touch, but it doesn't seem to have much mind share anymore. Hope they all find better positions soon.

The Wright flyers had their own engine. They were not gliders. The Wrights were making long, controlled flights powered by engines years before Dumont. First flights in 1903, first complete circle flight in 1904, and flights of over 20 miles and half an hour in 1905. The 1903 flight did not use a catapult, although several of their 1904 and 1905 flights did.

Dumont made a flight of 50 meters in 1906. Dumont's 1906 plane had no ability to do turns, rolls, or banking, useful maneuvers when you take a flight. It was not something that could be considered a usable airplane.

Lilienthal died flying one of his gliders. His wing curvature pressure tables were faulty and the Wright Brothers had to abandon them and build their own wind tunnel to measure and create a set of usable data. That led to their actual success flying.

Lilienthal was certainly important and served as inspiration, but it was the Wright's who really did all the invention and engineering to create what could credibly be called an airplane.

Very similar to iocane.

I prefer to go the other way. Put the commit ID(s) and/or links in the ticketing system as part of ticket comments. Now if the ticket system changes or is exported to another system the commit ID(s) will still be in the record. They are much less likely to change plus you can have multiple commits for an issue.

You can run x86 binaries on ARM Linux VMs running on Apple Silicon machines.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/run...

>> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe...

Hmm, I don't see the basis for this conclusion. This treatment is acting according to the common definition of a vaccine. Whether before or after disease activation is not part of the definition. As far as your personal belief, I understand that you may feel strongly, but I'm sorry to say that doesn't really enter into articulating an accepted scientific definition.

vaccine: any preventive preparation used to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific disease, ...

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine

Could you be more specific about any particular legal shield? They all have to go through the same phased trials system. I don't see any reason to conclude this is a legal shenanigan. What they have created meets the well-known definition of a vaccine.

Odd. If one is trying to build an under-the-radar facility you would generally want to over pay contractors and keep everyone especially happy.

Reminds me of a favorite quote:

“The best thing for being sad," replied Merlin, beginning to puff and blow, "is to learn something. That's the only thing that never fails. ... There is only one thing for it then — to learn. Learn why the world wags and what wags it. That is the only thing which the mind can never exhaust, never alienate, never be tortured by, never fear or distrust, and never dream of regretting. Learning is the only thing for you. Look what a lot of things there are to learn.”

― T.H. White, The Once and Future King

Well, Python is far from BASIC, but you can run a Python-based BASIC interpreter if you want to get the retro experience.

https://github.com/richpl/PyBasic

Did you enable the required developer flags?

From the preview page:

To enable WebGPU, turn on the “WebGPU”, “GPU Process: DOM Rendering” and “GPU Process: Canvas Rendering” feature flags in the Feature Flags tab in Safari Preferences. If you don’t see the Feature Flags tab, you need to first check “Show features for web developers” in the Advanced tab.