meritt

> This means we must force them to.

Advertising represents 98.5% of Facebook's revenue and you're proposing that we (btw, who is "we"? They are a global company) tell them they can't run ads? What exactly remains for the 43,000 employees and the 5% of the S&P500 market cap that you just decided to eliminate?

Because the price would be too high. $28/yr is the global per-user price but it's extremely skewed by region. The same equivalent price a US/CA user is $140/yr. Also the necessary 20% price increase every year would be really tough to convince people of the value.

How about instead we just stop using Facebook? I dropped it 3 years ago and haven't missed it one bit.

> One could imagine going back to the old Whatsapp model of charging users $1 per year

Facebook has around 2.45B monthly active users. On a global basis, they would need to charge every user $28/yr to make the same annual revenue. I'm not sure what studies to cite, but I think it's relatively safe to say they'd lose a significant portion of their userbase if they started charging, and thus would need to charge a whole lot more than $28/yr per user.

While I can appreciate the notion, there's a zero percent chance any large social media platform like Facebook will ever ban ads.

> if a dataset is really valuable, it wont be available for public consumption

Data vendors sell valuable data all the time to essentially anyone who is willing to pay their asking price. I don't see how this is any different? Just because aws is trying to run a marketplace doesn't suddenly make the data "public" in an open/free sense, there's still a price tag attached to it.

> and, like nike, won't be selling itself on amazon

Not every data vendor (or retailer since you keep bringing up Nike) has the necessary brand recognition, marketing budget, or technical proficiency to only sell direct to customers: that's why centralized marketplaces and alternate distribution channels exist.

> What is the open source alternative of this?

There are many public-domain datasets:

* https://aws.amazon.com/opendata/public-datasets/

* https://cloud.google.com/public-datasets/

* https://github.com/awesomedata/awesome-public-datasets

> Data is so cheap that it should be actually free

I feel like you haven't had the opportunity to work with data that has value.

You're curious whether or not it's realistic for an 82-year-old automotive company with 122 worldwide production plants who produced 11.1M cars last year compared to Tesla's 254k can have just 8 facilities producing electric cars in ~2 years from now?

That seems like a fairly reasonable goal to me.

You should consider sanitizing user input.

> our customers cannot contact us at all

I thought mailgun was for delivering emails? How/why are they your MX?

> clean minimal design

The design is so minimal I thought it wasn't loading correctly for me.

> Does anyone know anything behind the economics behind this?

You use VC money and run at a loss while focusing on marketing and tech evangelism, getting more and more startups and hopefully established companies using your software. As the cracks begin to show those growing organizations have too much tied to your system and they can't afford outages and need to scale. So they pay you for the Enterprise version of your software where you actually fix all of flaws present in the community version.

Look at MongoDB if you need a good case study. It was incredibly hyped from about 2009-2015, people would defend it in heated online arguments, and today it's rarely considered for greenfield projects. But they're making about $100M/qtr selling subscriptions to Enterprise & Atlas servicing the technical debt established during that hype cycle.

The Safeway API in question requires a user to be logged-in, authorized, and have explicitly agreed to a TOS (clickwrap). The HiQ v. LinkedIn case was centered around publicly accessible content which did not require the user to be authenticated nor have explicitly agreed to a TOS (browsewrap is not enforceable).

I'd argue the above case does not apply here.

Does the market need yet another browser extension scraper like this? No, I don't think it does.

[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search/scraper?_category=...

[2] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/?platform=wi...

It's a single-threaded process running a single core.

Mostly just curious: Why is the android version 9MB, the iOS version 62MB, and 3 different desktop versions a fixed 22MB?

As he chose to show us Django ORM code, instead of the postgres table definition, I'm guessing he's not exactly a postgres wizard. It reads to me like to me like he's writing to a normalized table (complete with foreign key constraints and likely indexes) and comparing against writing a single serialized blob to to a Redis key.

I too would expect the performance improvement to be significantly faster. This guy probably doesn't know how to benchmark his code, either.

Zoom [1], Cloudflare [2], and Datadog [3] had a fairly warm reception on HN and they're solid companies with high gross margins.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19465860

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20706702

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20781610

Your argument is a form of survivorship bias. You're not acknowledging all of the gaping security flaws in contemporary web-development frameworks. People were writing sloppy PHP before CSRF and XSS were even invented. Yet somehow, Python, Ruby and NodeJS have all had numerous CVEs despite those attack vectors being well known at the time a given framework was written.

You think SQLi was bad? You should spend some time thinking about the numerous attack vectors available today in nearly every GraphQL implementation where programmers can't move fast enough in adding it to their stack. Data exfiltration is no longer a flaw but a feature.

How is this achieving https interception with zero setup? Does that not require a system-level root CA to be installed and trusted?

Yes, just saw this too. This is showing across all service types for me. Anything that is billed based on a unit of time has exactly 2x the consumption than has happened so far month-to-date.

How would proper SNI prevent this approach or how is it different? Doesn't this just connect to a given IP and issue a request for the target domain?

> And the lack of access control does not implicitly give you authorization to view it.

I know you're trying really hard to sway opinion on HN for some reason, but I'm just going to reinforce the entire point of this thread and, assuming we're staying within the context of publicly accessible information: the Ninth Circuit Court strongly disagrees with you.

Common law torts, such as trespass to chattels, may apply. But it's not a criminal offense.

If you have to login to access the data, that data isn't publicly available, and unlikely to be protected by this decision.

Page 31 of the filing specifically differentiates this case from one regarding Facebook:

"While Power Ventures was gathering user data that was protected by Facebook’s username and password authentication system, the data hiQ was scraping was available to anyone with a web browser."

> your company already allows a third-party to access your email and chat history

I'd suggest, when trying to win over a technical community, you don't speak to us like we're completely ignorant. Those "third-parties" are the service providers themselves.

I'm going to trust Google and Slack a tiny bit more than LoopHQ's two employees (https://www.linkedin.com/company/loopscore/). And as neither of you have any technical experience whatsoever, this tells me you hired an outside team to build your products, which makes me question the on-going product quality, support, and security even more.

There's a 0% chance my current company nor any company I've worked for in the past is going to allow a third-party company to access our entire email and chat history. There are far too many instances of companies doing so with the intent to repackage and sell your data, or simply shoddy security on their side resulting in everything gets leaked.

If you want this to succeed with real companies, make it something we can host on-prem and lock down so we can manage the chain of custody, while still benefiting from your product.

I'm sure they're also rampant short sellers in cahoots with Big Oil. Give me a fucking break.

Tesla has had a lot of growing pains and they'll be a better company when you guys stop dismissing every single criticism and actually hold the company and Musk accountable for their missteps.

That's irrelevant for the vast majority of Americans today due to the TCJA changes. It'll be interesting to see the final numbers when the IRS publishes the statistics, but it was estimated that 90% of households took the standard deduction in 2018.

Whoa. Do you have a link to the legislation or news?

For anyone eager to read something now, Designing Data-Intensive Applications [1] is an excellent and completed book that covers nearly all of the same material with significant depth.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Designing-Data-Intensive-Applications...

It's absolutely not about the replacement cost of stuff. It's about protecting your assets from lawsuits.