rmrfrmrf

So what you're saying is you want EA to be able to have its own store on iPhone where Apple collects 30% on the backend anyway? Because that's what Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft do now. I don't see "I should be able to purchase iPhone apps at Target" as a compelling argument, much less relevant to the case at hand.

It turns out that not everyone appreciates being turned into an economic client state of the US. Nationalism is a direct reaction meant to (whether effective or not) reaffirm sovreignty.

type of device (iPhone, iPad, etc)

...prevention of mass homelessness?

In terms of labor, it doesn't really matter, since the guest worker program can fill any shortages that occur either due to moral objection or the lack of benefits that one would get from an established MIC player.

Alternatively, readers can improve their comprehension skills so that they can better recognize satire.

A frenetic but enjoyable piece. I think the biggest counterpoint, though, is that the fundamental, supposedly-earth-shattering contradictions, hardly matter in the current tech/finance economy. Tech stocks at the worst are essentially savings accounts, so a viable business model has become optional.

is no one else concerned that microsoft has been acquiring literally everything?

IMO the `Either` construct should be avoided in JS because inevitably you'll either need to wrap everything in `try ... catch` anyway or you'll be pulling your hair out trying to figure out how to get them to work in an async/event context, in which case you'll end up re-inventing the Promise api (perhaps wrapped in an extra thunk to make it more fp-friendly or whatever).

A more practical approach is to work along the grain of JS while getting inspiration from fp. A common snippet would be:

   function maybeUrl(str) {
     try {
       return new URL(str);
     } catch (err) {
       return null;
     }
   }

This is much more straight-forward and interoperable. Dealing with something like Left<InvalidUrlError> where you've created an entire error subclass and wrapping function for an unrecoverable failure that will be discarded is way overkill.

The unreliablility of thrown values in JS is a valid concern, but instead of trying to wrap all my code in a container construct, I simply wrap/convert the untrusted errors themselves if I need to use properties on an error reliably.

This is a good example of the contradictions in free market dogma. The reality is that the Facebook as it exists in the "rigged market" of the App Store violates users' privacy less than the "free market" versions on other platforms. Apple's restrictive policies have made them the only company to (have the power to) put checks on Facebook's information harvesting.

Breach a user's trust and/or misuse their data and you'll know about it pretty quickly. I'd wager that the average user cares much more about protecting, say, their browsing history, than they care about petty B2B contract drama.

The reason why developers want to make apps for iOS is because there's a large market. That market exists because Apple has done a great job prioritizing the protection of their customers' privacy and payment information.

If third party App Stores are ever forced onto iOS devices, that market vanishes completely. Crashes, slowdowns, battery drain, malware, and information theft will become the norm. Go no further than your gaming PC to witness the nightmare that is multiple app stores all competing for CPU and control/surveillance of your system, all needing to bring their own flavors of information-harvesting/exposing DRM.

This new round of digital YIMBYism is profoundly anti-consumer and stands to destroy the trust that Apple has built with its customers. I sincerely hope that those of us who have trusted Apple with our data will start to speak out before Google-backed lobbyists tranform iOS into a malware-ridden hellscape.

An important piece of context here is that making a living by playing chess competitively is close to nil, so many even top players like Kramnik end up taking consulting/PR jobs like this in order to pay the bills. I have a hard time believing Kramnik actually believes (or said directly) that AI ruined chess. My read is that he's not really promoting changes to the rules of chess as much as he's trying to build support for new types of chess variants.

It's true that the highest levels of play include teams of researchers and computers that develop 30+ move preparation, but what we're also seeing as a result of that are games that are more precise, which IMO is a fundamental component of chess "beauty". Some notable games that were deemed "beautiful" in the past are now seen as less-beautiful as it became apparent that play was suboptimal. Chess beauty now is less about flashy combinations and more about qualities of a position and reverse engineering the "logic" behind certain AI moves, which is still great but admittedly requires more of an investment on learning the game than a spectator might care about.

That framing, though, leaves out the massive benefit that AI has had in training and improving new players. It used to be that you needed to hire a chess master to play against and learn from in order to improve. Now your phone can easily give you a challenge of master-level strength, as well as analyze your games over the board to look for improvements.

Doesn't surprise me considering neoliberalism and anarchism have a lot of the same goals in terms of dismantling the state.

The argument put forth in the book Racecraft [1] is that America's founding on individual liberty juxtaposed with the economic reality of chattel slavery created a contradiction so stark that it was necessary to invent a framework to justify slavery culturally.

[1] Fields, Karen E, and Barbara J. Fields. Racecraft: The Soul of Inequality in American Life. 2012.

Not shocking at all that Vice would frame an algorithm designed to create construction jobs via federal funding as "broken" and "poisonous".

Alabama, Georgia, and Texas have laws restricting the sale and possession of sex toys.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what's going on. In a battle between global megacorps over my personal data, I choose Apple over Facebook and its ad buyers. Ascribe to Apple whatever ulterior motives you want, but it doesn't change the fundamentals. "Wouldn't it be nice if no one had control over your data except you" is a pipe dream (in the US, anyway) and the best you can do is pick your poison when it comes to who owns your data.

It's really not a big deal.

> This is some strange reasoning that I have yet to seen myself. If you can do the hovers states/drop down menus in CSS, why not do them in CSS, even if you're using React?

Because when requirements change and your hover animation needs some additional flare to it in certain cases, you'll be glad that you had automated unit tests to verify original behavior still works along with your customizations.

Think about that next time you volunteer to teach children how to code ;)

Not even sure if Boeing and Airbus are good examples considering that both are intimately tied with the state.

Pretty easy to figure out what's going on:

1. You submit your app bundle and your credentials to Apple for notarization.

2. Apple records your information and goes through each library, framework, and your code, checking the code signing info and "fingerprint" of each for known malware.

3. Apple issues the ticket for stapling to the app bundle.

Now say, for example, that libffmpeg-0.1.2-beta2.dylib is found to mine cryptocurrency:

1. Apple goes through their database and finds the app where the malware was reported.

2. Apple marks that fingerprint as malicious.

3. Apple now flags any other apps that use libffmpeg-0.1.2-beta2.dylib (by checking the fingerprint) and disables any versions of any app running that version. Additionally, any other attempts to notarize apps with the malicious dylib are rejected.

Notarization provides 2 major benefits for devs that I can see:

1. Apple doesn't need to revoke your entire certificate just to block one version of an app.

2. Apple's audit trail of who notarized the app (and from where) prevents cases where stolen credentials result in a DoS of the victim (e.g. your account being locked, your name and address permabanned, and funds frozen).

Now do this thought experiment again with MyTrojanKeylogger.app instead of MyGreatApp.app.

Thinking about the team(s?) at Epic that had to work 120hr weeks in endless crunch just so that their CEO could troll another CEO.

If you're looking for an actual spicy take, you could say that reproducible builds are impossible once the durability of hardware/state of the universe is accounted for, but that the concept provides yet another black hole of cash and effort with which devsec can build a cottage industry around.

At this point, the entire financial sector is decoupled from actual productivity, and to pass moral judgement of one highly exploitative industry over another solely due to one's ability to be regulated seems myopic, at best.

you don't have any control of what protocols your apps use and if they're encrypted or not

it's good for things like public wifi and other untrusted networks since your data is encrypted from your machine to the vpn server

The consensus on both ends of the political spectrum over the past 30 years is that public education is a failure and must be abolished through either defunding or diverting funding to charter schools. Providing more funding to public schools would undermine that goal.