uses

I've been a Simple customer since launch, and have used it as my primary bank since ING Direct was turned into Capital One.

It's mildly depressing to be reminded once again that the dream of startup founders these days isn't to build something, but to sell something... specifically to a bigger company. Which will inevitably delete the thing, once it serves its use. Which is to provide presence in some kind of defensive strategy.

I'm not sure what to use as my primary financial institution now. I have an account with my local credit union, but their app is mediocre. Simple's high quality app was the main reason I used Simple. I really just want an institution + app representation of such, that provides a 21st century experience.

Airtable

To me, restore is one of the most frightening commands in git. It has an innocuous name but it can delete arbitrary amounts of uncommited work without any further interaction, warnings, or confirmation.

Yeah, I'm pretty curious because it must've cost in $10k-100k range right? Isn't this the type of vanity purchase that usually happens after you validate your idea with 10,000 customers and you got a round of investment to go big? I would expect a newly launched startup to use getpopapp.info, or used a made-up company name with an acquirable domain.

there is more than one way to do it

When will Windows Linux happen?

I genuinely don't understand the point of Windows as it exists anymore.

  * Games are developed on cross platform engines. I can't remember the last game I played that was Windows-exclusive.
  * Business apps work in the browser or Electron, or are otherwise cross-platform. Things that aren't, could work with emulation
  * Developers are using unix-like operating systems, and MS has leaned hard into that. Windows is incongruent with the rest of their developer strategy.
  * The server ecosystem is almost entirely Linux based, apparently even on Azure
  * By all appearances, Windows is now a service that upsells other services, and there won't be a Windows 11 as we would traditionally think of it
  * The people who know what an OS is, prefer unix-like OSes by a vast margin. The people who don't, wouldn't notice the difference.
  * x86 looks even less like the future than it did a month ago

So I don't understand what the holdup is?

Does this allow me to basically create my own bank? Like could I make my own version of Simple, and use this as the back end? I'm confused because I thought there were a lot of legal requirements to banking and not just the actual services they provide, which this seems to commoditize.

Well it is like that, except instead of picking any attribute possible, you're picking from a pre-selected list which have been saved as variables, i.e. utility classes. And it also provides workarounds for the things that inexplicably don't work in inline CSS, like media queries.

I got back into python recently and one thing that really confused me: there's no good way to manage packages, apparently? Meaning: if someone clones my repo, there's no single, correct way for me to have specified the dependencies in a machine-readable format, so they can run the equivalent of "npm install", and get things working. Is that really true?

It's amazing the high percentage of HNers who want every online platform to become 4chan.

> We did reach out to the post office for comment and a spokesperson told me, “In most cases these incidents do not involve mail that had been lost in our network and later found. What we typically find is that old letters and postcards – sometimes purchased at flea markets, antique shops and even online – are re-entered into our system. The end result is what we do best – as long as there is a deliverable address and postage, the card or letter gets delivered.”

Yeah, you're probably right. I should've said "web standards" rather than "HTML". Ideally, a page structure standard would use a terse file format that supports hierarchy like json or yaml.

More than anything this reminds me of the fact that HTML has failed on a basic level, to keep up with the ways that users want to experience content, and that designers want to present content. The browser has no real concept of "page navigation" or "site navigation" with any kind of state, or the "current" navigation item, or of hierarchy, breadcrumbs, menus, or other core navigational concepts involving site and page structure.

With a few built-in "site structure" features in the html standard, the browser could do a large part of what developers end up reimplementing over and over again - both with and without JS. A large part of "knowing about usability" is just knowing how to execute these basic navigation features without goofing up on the many pitfalls available to you.

For example, imagine if there was some kind of Site Structure standard, or Page Structure standard. The browser could then generate standardized navigation elements with perfect UX on every platform, and sure, you can style them, but the basic functionality just works everywhere without having to make advanced javascript/html/css menus that take into account concepts like responsiveness, touch interface, or accessibility.

Not sure who this is for. The people advanced enough to be questioning architectural convention already know that "using a framework" isn't the right answer 100% of the time always and forever. The people who are just starting out really should focus on learning The Right Way first, and then, after that, far after that, they can start Reinventing the Wheel Because They Know Better.

I wonder what the ownership transfer of a multi-billion dollar app looks like?

Like, what emails, button clicks, phone calls, etc, is involved in changing the ownership of the iOS app from one party to another? Presumably it's a different process from like, a toy app with zero downloads?

It's weird how questions of "is what we're doing, wrong?" can be so easily and inevitably obliterated by the profit motive.

Your first sentence isn't even true and you can go right here and read the table that shows their revenue sources: https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-... To spoil it for you: in 2019, First-Class Mail and Shipping and Packages made significantly more revenue than Marketing Mail. Yes, USPS needs some new revenue streams. They do provide significant value that others cannot meet, which is daily mail delivery to anywhere in the USA. But yes, they need to find other unique services too.

This feels too similar to my default mode of thinking, which is risk aversion, and constantly thinking about what can go wrong, and then steering away from that. Is that because this concept isn't really for me, like it's more helpful for go-getter optimists?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say? You can click on the author's name to see he's the senior games editor at Ars. The results on Duckduckgo are generic article spinner SEO spam bot sites that copy and repost articles. And I'm not sure what the "conflict of interest" would be? And who's the PR firm?

I think there has been growing momentum behind the idea that some needs aren't met best by a market approach. One of the ideas behind UBI is that people can figure out what they need, and just spend the money.

But that doesn't really solve the needs that may not be optimal for a 100% market approach - probably the big two being health and education.

Vox Reset covered worker surveillance software in their most recent two episodes: https://www.vox.com/reset "The future of work pt 1 & 2"

One nice thing about being in a union is that if my upper management ever got a twinkle in their eye about this kind of thing (they wouldn't, because they're cool), I'm 100% sure I could flat out tell them no, AND keep my job.

If I wasn't in a union, I'd like to think I'm personally in a position where I could still tell them no and deal with the consequences. But I know a lot of people won't be in that position.

From what I've seen the thinking about permanent change is more that, massive changes are being made now, and inertia will mean those changes will stay in place, because they'll actually turn out to be better anyway. It's just that the cost of implementing or even considering those changes was too high before, but it's necessary now.

If your default approach is cynicism, how would you know the difference between let's say a topic being relevant to world events, and fueling agendas? Like did you consider that maybe people genuinely believe that discussion regarding UBI is especially relevant during this once-in-history, civilization-disrupting event?

I know right, how can we give any credence to this thoroughly researched report about how technology is being used to promote state sponsored disinformation campaigns, when Buzzfeed is out there AB testing headlines?

It's strange to me that passwords exist in 2019. Somehow the best practice is to use a passwords manager, which is an entire layer of poorly pasted-on UI that uses hacks to intercept every login you make whether via app or website. And I'm not saying password managers are bad, they're amazing for security, it's just odd that password managers are the best thing we have because their UI is terrible. It seems like these things should be handled at the browser / device level for universal one-tap login.

I'm confused, how do you design a database where things in A can't reference things in B? It's not relational at that point right?

Or is this just about the problems of DBs where you enforce referential integrity? In which case, if that's such a problem, like just don't enforce referential integrity...right?

Well, without having seen the episode, it's possible that the Ravnica piece was this product, which muddies the waters a bit https://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/rpg-products...

> we're now happy to blame some algorithm for our shortcomings and take no personal responsibility for our actions

Seems like a bit of a strawman?

> Shouldn't I be accountable for my own actions

Certainly, and those using algorithms to direct human behavior have accountability as well, wouldn't you say? Are they not accountable for their behavior?

Wouldn't it be rather opposed to the way we think about most products and services if those implementing algorithms were held exempt from all consequences or responsibilities of putting their product into the world?

Surely you acknowledge that algorithms wield incredible power? Or else we wouldn't be having this discussion nor would the world's most powerful corporations be investing vast resources into using algorithms to further their goals?

I feel like a large part of where we are in the world now is because in 2015 or so, YouTube mindlessly and singlehandedly funneled millions of apolitical young male gamers into gamergate extremism. It took forever for YouTube to stop giving me personal recommendations for various alt-right content no how many times I told it I wasn't interested.

This is a really basic appeal to worse problems fallacy. You also assume that the same resources used for this somehow take away from addressing climate change.