edko

I do not see how stopping the sale of iPhones in Nebraska would help Apple solve the potential loss of revenue from the new competition in the repairs market. The main thing it would do is reduce sales revenue. I think every shareholder (based in Nebraska or otherwise) would be concerned about that.

There is this guy in Omaha, the one whose company owns over 57 million Apple shares, who might care.

To save Nebraska, maybe Apple should campaign for similar laws to be passed in all states; then, there will no incentive for the hackers to move there.

Rather than cut prices (I think $5 is low enough), I would prefer if they would beef up their specs. For $5, DO gives you only 512MB vs 1GB from Linode.

It compares pretty well. It is possible to define Scala bindings to JS libraries, so you can use them more or less seamlessly. Bindings to the most popular ones (jQuery, React, etc.) are already defined, and actively maintained. It is relatively simple to add your own. A nice thing is that, since Scala is a strongly-typed language, you get code-completion and refactoring "for free". However, if you prefer to use dynamic typing, ScalaJS lets you do that easily too.

Also, like the grandparent comment said, ClojureScript is a very nice language too, with powerful tooling.

The nice thing about ScalaJS and ClojureScript is that they both can run on the browser, and on a JVM backend. Scala also has an LLVM backend that is being actively developed, but on its early stages. (ScalaJS is very mature and performant)

That's an old stereotype. I go there often, and, in my experience, it doesn't hold anymore.

I don't know Haskell either, but the book starts from scratch. It can be followed with no problem.

Type-driven development with Idris (https://www.manning.com/books/type-driven-development-with-i...).

It was a real eye-opener of what types can do.

I think a closer McDonald's analogy would be if it did not allow Coca-Cola to sell its drinks elsewhere.

Yes, but they do that as a buyer: you have to sell to them at the most favorable price. Then they will sell it at whatever price they see fit. If they want to bundle it for free with a toaster, they do not force you to do the same. Apple, on the other hand, tells you: your sales price to a third party cannot be lower than my sales price to a third party.

I think there is a difference, though: I'd imagine Walmart would buy a certain amount of copies of your game, and they would negotiate their purchase price, squeezing you as much as they can. Then they would mark it up and sell it on their own. If they see that you are selling it for half the price on your website, then that gives them a stronger purchasing argument to lower your price.

Apple, on the other hand, is imposing restrictions on which price you must sell it to third parties, and, that, I think, is illegal.

There used to be a rule for the Mac App Store (I don't know if it is there anymore) that forbade developers from selling the same app at a lower price somewhere else. Wouldn't this be a case of anti-competitive price-fixing?

Maybe, in the not so distant future, the use of VR in real estate will be to give everybody a seaview mansion when, in reality, they live within four boring walls.

I sometimes get the impression that all the secrecy, and leaks, and rumors, etc. are a game they play to generate anticipation and excitement about their products. There is no surprise when they announce, but we are all awaiting the big event anyways.

Some years ago, I bought a perpetual license for FlashBuilder 4.7. Recently, it failed to build an Air package because the product, which hasn't been updated for years, connects to an obsolete time server. To fix the problem, I followed the directions in Adobe's support site. Right after doing this, it asked me to re-enter my license key. It rejected it, saying it was no longer valid. A license that was sold as perpetual, no longer valid!

Their support was completely worthless: after being redirected to five different support teams that had no clue how to solve my issue, I realized I was never going to get a solution, and gave up.

My personal lesson learned: never buy or use anything from Adobe ever again.

Even Cuba and North Korea hold elections.

I am not sure I understand this: if I develop an application and distribute it using the installer that embeds the JVM, then I owe Oracle??

The JVM: it is not only Java than runs on it, but Scala, Clojure, Ceylon, etc. Although many of these languages support other compilation targets (JavaScript, for example), the JVM is always their main and most powerful platform.

I switched from a MacBook Pro to a Dell XPS 13 (Kaby Lake i7). From a hardware point of view, it is an excellent machine, and I do not miss Apple at all. What I do miss terribly is macOS.

I am reluctantly thinking of jumping ship too. What is keeping me back is that, I remember, a little while after Windows 10 was released, there was a scandal because it sent users' data back to Microsoft, disregarding privacy settings. I haven't followed the story too much since, and could not find anything saying the issue was "fixed". Does anybody know how the story ended?

Just wondering: if I ran two instances of your application, would I have "guríes" or "gurises"? :-)

Just nitpicking: you use the Spanish flag to switch languages, but the grammatical person and verb conjugation you use are generally not currently used in Spain.

I would be willing to pay for a macOS license that would allow it to run in any machine I like. This will probably never happen but, who knows, if Microsoft has become a Platinum member of the Linux Foundation, anything can happen.

"Even Dr. Steven Novella, host of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast, has said on the air that the digits of pi are random. They are not. First of all, they are 100% predictable by calculating pi."

Does this mean that randomness is just our inability to "predict"? If we could see the future just as clearly as we see the present and the past, would there be randomness?

I was not familiar with it. I will check it out. Thanks for the suggestion.

I agree that maybe those presidents would not have been necessarily bad. Maybe, if Dole would have won, G.W. Bush would have never been elected, and the world would now be a very different (and better) place.

I think malleable politicians are malleable because they try to benefit the largest section of the population that they can. Conservatives, lately, have focused on benefiting a very small segment of the population directly, expecting the benefits to trickle down.

However, the trickle down has not worked. I know very little about economics, but, I remember, headlines in newspapers eight years ago were mainly about unemployment, and the growth of the National debt. The euro was $1.30 (now it buoys around $1.10).

I think the American economy is much better now than it was eight years ago, and a larger section of the population has benefited from that, than when principled conservatives were in the government. (And this is just from an economic point of view, which is a small part of the benefits).

I think you are right, and I apologize to @mattnewton for accusing him of downvoting me, without factual proof. I will not erase my comment because I think his response and yours are valuable.

It is very ironic you mention class struggle. You belong to the class of HN users who have the right to down-vote comments. I do not. You use your class' prerogative to down-vote my comments, in an attempt to censor my thoughts. Not because they are inappropriate, but merely because you disagree with them. Talk about class struggle!

No. I am saying moral principles change with the times, and politics is a process that reflects and adapts to the times. Remember 2008's Obama: where was he on gay marriage? Was he such an open advocate? What about all previous presidents? Were they all evil because they were not as progressive as we are today?

"Equal rights for people regardless of race, creed or gender identity" is not a Bernie exclusive. You do not win elections by being right (if you need proof, look at current events). Sometimes, being too absolutely right, and not in sync with the times, makes you lose elections to someone who is very wrong. That is what I mean by saying that you cannot be consistently right for 24 years: the timing of your message also has to be right.