josephagoss

I am not a fan of this trend where other lowly paid software developers want to bring down the salaries of highly paid software developers.

To be honest, I can't imagine highly skilled software developers on the wages that the OP considers in his article.

Why are some people obsessed with highly skilled people making a lowly income?

> We've spent thousands of dollars with them.

That's a decent amount of money right? It sounds like they were not using the $5 plans.

Thank you for this, I have a large client where we were considering DigitalOcean and the yearly spend could easily be in the thousands. Now I'll strike them off of the list. Automated deletion of VM's and backups, absolutely unacceptable.

The VM hosting market isn't looking good at the moment, seems like each provider has some dark history at this point, it's really frustrating.

I can see that a lot of people are saying how this guy commissioned an app, fair enough.

However, as there is now a bunch of people reading this that are also somewhat interested in the subject, myself included, does anyone want to share any stories of older people (60+) that have actually built applications or started a career in programming/engineering?

I am really interested to hear them...

Is this the general view? What is the best course of action here? Stop using Rails or somehow protect it better?

Space tourism.

Can this tool offer deduplication (so that changing a folder name does not re-upload thousands of files) or is that something I would have to code into my own backup solution?

Can you self host Blogger and download the code?

It wouldn't surprise me. I remember reading last year that iTunes alone is a larger business than Yahoo. The scale of Apple is unreal.

I'm not saying that Government can't do great things, but it should never be the only player in town when it comes to innovation on a large scale. Denying private citizens the ability to have great wealth basically gives the Government a large scale monopoly on far out projects.

These are the types of projects where a single billionaires great wealth can inspire other investors to come along. If Musk couldn't pour millions into his ventures, it's unlikely the average investor would have followed him into space.

In addition, the USA invested in the internet, space and atomic weapons solely for the purpose of war, even the hubble is based on military technologies. I am again concerned that people are arguing for a future that's dependent on the needs of politicians or the military.

Even China was smart enough to see value in the capitalism model. Allow for the ability of great wealth, allow the private citizen to decide how to deploy the fruits of their work and something good might come out it.

Also, the Government has taken over a billion dollars in tax from Mark Zuckerberg, so the Government has plenty to play with. Remember, it's always easier to play with other people's money, hence the inefficiency regarding the use of tax dollars.

> Wouldn't it be better if it was impossible to amass that concentration of wealth in the first place?

Just curious, but that would deny many millionaires and billionaires the chance to change the world. For sure, SpaceX and Tesla probably would not exist [1].

I'm surprised that this sentiment is growing among many people that somehow they believe the Government is going to be better at experimenting and managing these types of far out projects rather than the free market.

SpaceX has probably the most advanced rockets in the world, far surpassing that of all other countries.

I am not sure I want the future of our species solely in the hands of politicians and not giving private enterprise a chance to rise up and have a shot.

If I misunderstood the gist of your post, I do apologise.

[1] I know they both have taken Government money, but both Tesla and SpaceX could not have been started by a Government politician or employee.

I had no idea Tesla but the batteries from Panasonic, I thought the entire point of Tesla is that they build them in house? And what about the Gigafactory?

If it's all truly Panasonic's tech, I am surprised so many people put their money into Tesla.

Companies are essentially groups of people. I'm not sure that taking away the right to sue from groups of people is such a good idea.

I see this as actually giving power back to the people.

Citizens have been able to sue the Government for a long time, English law is littered with cases where Citizens have won against the state for hundreds of years.

The whole point of a free state is that the entities within that state, people or groups of people (for example, companies) are able to keep their rulers in check.

Let's remember, the Government is sometimes wrong and needs to be kept in check.

And the same can be said of many Men...

The first thing that came to my mind, is that many girls that are interested in this stuff may now feel more comfortable than ever to enroll in Computer Science, as the issue of sexism is being tackled and talked about a lot.

I do not trust child protection services, they mean well but they overuse their power on a 'feeling' and worse, 'career advancement'.

My family was completely ripped apart and destroyed by the child protection services in the UK.

It's disgusting that oil and gas can receive 20x subsidies. It's like a cruel sick joke.

It's not like .373 added anything to the plot. This probably means that the IP was a mistake, which is odd as I heard that they had network experts working on all of these tech scenes.

How so? Do you mean driverless cars or something else they are working on?

Uber is such a good experience in comparison to Taxis.

Here in Perth Uber provides a clean, calm experience where you don't have to worry about being scammed. Almost every time I've taken a taxi they have pulled the "No change for your fifty" trick, driven the long way which devolves into you having to tell the driver the directions which save you $15 off of the fare or even the times that my Taxi driver has pulled over mid-trip to purchase themselves some energy drinks (without asking me if that's ok).

I can't wait until the taxis and their Government issued monopoly are over. All that matters is that their business model built upon bad experiences, arrogance and scamming is finally being challenged and they deserve to lose these artificially inflated "assets".

  > It’s likely that thousands of Amazon customers don’t
  > realise they are giving away their valuable intellectual
  > property rights just for the privilege of using AWS; but
  > realise they should.

Does this mean that AWS is allowed to use the IP of any customer hosting their system on AWS?

I've built an application on AWS but would not have if this meant handing over all my IP to Amazon.

I must be misunderstanding the issue as I doubt any company or person would use AWS if it meant giving up their entire IP.

Can someone please explain what I am missing here?

I was scared for a second that Hacker News was now presenting stories based on location. Nice to see our City making some headlines. :)

To be honest I would have thought that Photoshop would only be used for textures, modelling and mocking up in C4D is very easy and fast for 3D meshes.

I think that if they are collecting user data it's only due to Government pressure.

I can't imagine any business related reason that would require Apple to store and harvest user data. When you make such a large profit on hardware, you don't need to scrounge around for bits and bytes to sell to the advertisers.

Of course this excludes the minimum data they need to maintain warranties and your payment details.

Is "Software Developer" really the most common job in several US states? I'm really finding that hard to believe.

We spend over $2,000 per year and it's just me and my girlfriend. From the sounds of it you have either very good rates or perhaps a frugal lifestyle? Either way it's impressive.

Does the Apple Watch use the same type of sensor as competing Watch devices?

I'm hoping Netflix gains enough market share with their original programming that it becomes suicide for other producers not to list their shows on Netflix too.

Even if to pay for this Netflix has a premium version... ($20 per month for example)

A company should be allowed the freedom to do what they want when it comes to selling their own product. Why would we want more laws restricting business?

What if the truth was, a one time payment to watch a show like House of Cards cost $100-$200? By offering a subscription they make it more accessible to more people (They let you cancel your Netflix subscription at any time)

Interesting that there was no mention of Modafinil.

I believe that one of the most "abused" drugs for "productivity" is currently Modafinil, far more powerful than Adderall and without all those side effects.

Of course, long term side effects are unknown.