jlangenauer

Funnily enough, about 5 years ago, I did pretty much the same thing. It turned out to be a right pain to actually find, and keep all the data up to date.

(Comments at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5434186 - the actual site has been taken down)

It's a bit rough to work with still - the IDE support is still a work in progress (though improving) and there is a compile step with every iteration (incremental compilation has improved this too).

Diesel is the main library for interacting with SQL databases, it wasn't async last time I used it, and a quick web search tells me it still isn't - this has been a BIG problem with Rust over the last year, as everyone waits for the async implementation to finally become stable.

Rust is a funny beast at the moment - you have to deal with the learning curve, you have to deal with the unstable/pre-1.0 libraries (some of which are fine), you have to deal with all the errors the compiler throws at you.

But once you've done all that, something magical happens: you end up with software that is mind-blowingly stable and blazingly fast. It doesn't throw segfaults, it doesn't leak memory, it just works, and works amazingly well.

Really, it's time we started to reevaluate the whole "limited liability" thing. There's been numerous examples of people who start businesses, run too close to the wind, and then push the cost onto their suppliers, customers and employees (rather than the investors, who morally should wear the cost as they will be recieving the gains).

Well, there's these visualisations about polio and measles in the United States, which are very compelling for the last two points.

http://www.randalolson.com/2016/03/04/revisiting-the-vaccine...

I think "business" is far too grand a word for what's being described here. This is old school trading - buying something, and selling it for more than you bought it.

But it's being done in a highly competitive environment, where everything is commodified. Alibaba has commodified manufacturing, shipping was always a commodity, and Amazon has commodified the marketing and fulfilment end.

The problem with commodities is that it's very difficult to create a competitive advantage - if you do happen to find one, it'll be transient and fleeting as others cotton on to it.

I hope the author is also keeping track of the time he spends on this. At $7.64 profit per item, assuming he does sell all 200 handbags, that's $1528 in profit. If he's spent 152 hours on this, that's just $10/hour for his effort. If he ends up spending 211 hours, he's earning less than the US minimum wage.

If you don't launch, I can predict with 100% confidence how many people will sign up: 0.

What do you have to lose at this point? The money's already spent.

Further proof, as if any was needed, why other countries require something like the GDPR, backed up be significant penalties, and well-resourced enforcement.

It won't happen in Australia though, as we are governed by fools who barely understand technology, and if they need to, rely on the representations of business to make any decisions.

Have you ever experienced care with the NHS in the UK? Or Australia's public health service? Or Germany's universal health care?

I have, and in all 3 cases, I've seen exceptional care from professional doctors, nurses and support staff delivered with dignity, humanity and care.

Your statement is pure ideology.

On the other hand, if something goes wrong, or you wish to cancel or change your flights, you'll have to deal with the online travel agency, and won't be able to deal with the airline.

This is in the UK. Laws protecting tenants there are, to put it politely, pretty thin.

I see you've created an account just to make provocative statements on various political issues, which isn't the purpose of HN.

The "immigrants depress wages" trope is never that simple, as the UK is about to find out. In an economy where unemployment is very low, like the UK, they need that supply of labour to keep business ticking over. Should it disappear, growth will become constrained, and prices (along with wages) will have to rise.

Dubrovnik is one of the most awful places I've visited - literally everything is optimised purely to extract money from tourists.

Want to walk around the city walls? That'll be €20! And if over-priced, mediocre restaurants are your thing, there's plenty of them too.

Although it has become fashionable to decry making personal changes as "irrelevant" and "ineffective" with the lie that since everyone isn't doing it, there's not point in anyone doing it, making changes to how you and your family live is still very important.

Things you can do:

1. Find an energy provider who sells green energy - here in Germany, it's possible (and common) to buy 100% green energy, but I don't know what it's like where you are. Even if it costs more, get the green energy - it's a big change you can make that won't affect your lifestyle one bit.

2. Reduce the amount of red meat you eat. The environmental costs of this are well known. Give it up if you can, but if not, at least reduce it.

3. See if you can fly less. If you fly intercontinenally, then the CO2 from that will dwarf almost anything else you do. Again, this is something that's easy to say, but it's something that's very effective.

Those are the changes you can make in your personal life. There are plenty of other good suggestions here as to how to make systemic changes.

Nope, equity is pretty common here as part of comp packages.

This is not true.

I'm Australian, and it was easy to get my Blue Card, and more recently my permanent residency in Germany. Compared to the nightmare of dealing with the UK Home Office, moving to Germany was a breeze.

(For those who don't know: if you have a 4-year degree, and can get a job-offer that pays €48K or above, you can easily get a Blue Card, which lets you work in Germany. Keep that job, and after 21 months, you can get a Niederlassungserlaubnis (permanent residency) with B2-level German, or after 33-months with rudimentary German. It's an amazing deal.)

> low salaries for software engineers. The most of senior software developers will earn 50.000 - 60.000 EURO anually and after paying taxes it's only ~2.600 EURO per month (3.000 USD)

Nonsense. Here in Berlin, €60k would only be competitive for an engineer with maybe 2-3 years experience.

Good senior people can (and should) get €85k - €90k. If you're in Berlin, and want to be pointed in the direction of companies who pay that, hit me up.

VPEng / CTO / Director-level roles are now €100K minimum in Berlin, and often significantly above.

In Germany, even if you are a German national, there's no guarantee that the state will be able to fund pensions as it does now, due to the shift in demographics.

I love it here, but I operate under the assumption that I'll have to provide for myself in retirement.

It's often attributed to either Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, or his wife Flo. I can't find a definitive source after a quick Google search, though.

As an Australian who lives in Berlin, I find this hilarious, remembering the (cretinous) debates about daylight saving back in Australia, particularly Queensland where I was born.

For 30 years, Queensland has been in a different time zone to NSW and Victoria during summer, because it has never adopted daylight savings. For this, such wonderful arguments were advanced such as "It will fade the curtains" (Wait, wat) and it will upset the cows to be milked at a different time.

And across the other side of Australia, Western Australia (always a, er, special place) has had FOUR referendums in the last 50 years on whether to adopt daylight savings. All were rejected.

So watching Europe deal with this pragmatically and quickly is quite pleasing to watch.

Imagine prioritising the privacy of ordinary people over the need for exceptionally wealthy investors to become even wealthier.

What a sick society.

Not sure where you've been looking, but this is not my experience at all here in Berlin. You can't generalise from a few crap startups (which exist everywhere, btw) to the entire ecosystem.

No they won't, for the same reason that cities without public transport or minimal public transport have horrible traffic: the sheer density of people a bus, tram or light rail line can move far exceeds private vehicles with one or two people in them.

It's not even ethics, it's straight out theft. If you agree to pay someone for work, they perform the work, and you fail to pay them, that's theft. Or fraud, if you prefer.

Either way, they are crimes, and company owners who fail to pay their employees should do jail time.

Truly, Australia is governed by morons. Would it be asking too much for a highly paid minister of the crown, who supposedly is supposed to lead government policy in an area, to have substantial knowledge of it?

Instead, we have these lawyers who treat maths, science and technology with contempt, who legislate for us, and don't understand what the fuck they're even talking about.

There are no constitutional protections of rights in Australia (particularly related to excesses of the police and legal system), so there was probably very little legal basis for Apple to refuse.

One of the great things about GDPR is that this sort of thing will be flatly illegal. Want to use my IP address to look up information about me? Great, so long as you ask for, and get, my explicit consent.

Or, to put it another way: a big group of tech people who have no interest in protecting the data of their customers, preferring to be able to cut corners and do as they please with information that is not theirs.

There is nothing in the GDPR that allows for a person or lawyer to sue a company for GDPR non-compliance. All they can do is complain to the regulatory authority in their EU country, which has the sole power to issue fines. And if you're not taking care of my data, then I have no problem at all with you being fined.

The same thing happened in Sydney - Parramatta was a separate town until (I'm guessing here) the 1850s or so, Camden was until recently a separate town, but it's being swallowed up by the outwards expansion of Sydney.

As a former resident of Sydney, this will change nothing. Sydney is fucked because of a number of interrelated circumstances, none of which are easy to change:

- The first is its geography. The harbour is a giant wall through a big part of the city, with only a few chokepoints where people can cross. These are congested, and constrain the entire road and rail transportation network. The Pacific ocean constrains growth to the east, the blue mountains to the West, and the national park to the south. The only growth corridors are towards the southwest, and northwest - a long, long way from the CBD.

- It's not nearly dense enough. Australians love their free-standing houses, both the McMansions in the new suburbs, and the trendy terraces in the inner city, beloved by Baby Boomers who have a convenient lifestyle while living in an "urban village" - of course, they all bought back in the 90s when it was still affordable. These two types of housing make it incredibly inefficient to build a workable rail public transport network, so a lot of the PT is forced to use busses, which are not as popular, and suffer from the same congestion at the chokepoints as well as the additional car traffic from everyone who isn't well-served by PT. This is a lot of people.

- Any attempts to build higher density housing, particularly in the sainted inner suburbs will be met with cries of "Over-development", even by people who should know better such as the Greens.

I moved to Berlin a few years ago, and it's a comparable city in size to Sydney (3.5m vs around 5m in Sydney). It works far better because it's far denser, and the level of infrastructure provided makes living here a breeze by comparison. Berlin came of age before the motor car, and was geographically constrained for quite a period there by an actual wall. Sydney really started to grow just as the car become popular and widely-owned.

A purely "defense" contractor, protecting the country itself? No, nothing wrong with that.

But what is euphemistically called "defense" is far more often about offense - attacking those countries and people who displease or are inconvenient to you, making sure the world is structure to suit your* interests, usually at the expense of the interests, and often the lives of people elsewhere in the world.

* - In reality, the interests of the elite of your country.