temp667

Very interesting.

This would explain the response I got (backstory - I am a contributor to a number of open source packages / not totally clueless, but was coming in from a micro personal account). I was like, how the heck do they afford this response for $99! (or whatever it cost back then - this was a long time ago).

I kept my support plan active for a year as a courtesy though I never had another question aside from the first two I put in.

That said, as a programmer I like time to focus so being asked customer questions would drive me nuts, hopefully they filter out the idiots who just can't setup things right (80% of issues are not bugs but customer setup issues).

Thank goodness we've all been conditioned by the EU cookie consent screens to say yes to every damn popup that pops up!

Seriously - the EU is bombarding us with damn cookie notice screens. I wish apple had been more in charge of the web than these EU folks.

Initially I thought some straightforward fun first party games would be great. Make them cheap / free with platform, do some of the standards (a runner, a platformer, etc etc). Keep them pretty simple. That would have been nice - show off a bit what the platform can do, but be a fast follower for some popular genres.

What engine was SGE using? When I heard AWS wasn't just going to do something like license Epic I thought - uh oh... here we go!

Yeah - there are folks I think interested in having things done. They pay, you do it, they are happy.

And then there are folks who have their own problems - they may be disorganized? Have internal conflicts? Have other financial issues. So they come in saying - hey give us a break on cost. you do. And then you are in for it, because they can't agree internally, complain about everything.

This EU situation reminds me of that. Instead of saying how can we help increase production its endless blaming etc. Isn't the company an EU company? Why wouldn't they make wht they can?

Jetbrain stuff has always been slow - until I got an AMD 5600 (ram at 3200). For whatever reason, this combo of chip and updates to their software maybe (I turn off a lot of the add ins) - I've stopped being annoyed at the speed. It's "fast enough".

There is really only one simple concept needed to understand what the SEC cares about.

When a big hedge fund is selling a stock short, they can do so without even borrowing it. As a result, the buyer ends up not owning it and the stock fails to deliver - called a fail.

There are a lot of easy penalities that could be applied here. Reprice based on lowest price in intervening period prior to deliver. Provide a 10% rebate per day if not delivered T+3, up to perhaps a 200% rebate. Etc.

But instead, nothing happens, the fail to deliver just continues. I took a look at Gamestop on the fail to deliver list. It's been there forever.

I don't trade, but the whole fail to deliver game seems rotten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_to_deliver

So weird - and a good lesson for business. Generally the customer that gives you the most hassle on front end and is the cheapest will demand the most and hassle you the most for the entire period.

This argument reminds me of someone who I once tried to work with, I said, I'll just charge you my costs instead of full rate (this is like a 3x difference in price). So many arguments around cost, so many demands on quick delivery. Meanwhile, the folks paying 3x kept on reasonably agreed program and took 1/10th the time.

Anyone else have this experience?

Rumor had it astra wasn't going to mark up a huge amount.

Motorcycles are a pointless regression in safety. Fast cars are a pointless regression (and have terrible rear side views in many cases). Many things that are "cool" are also regressions - almost all big screens and apple carplay etc is distracting. The trade is that people like cars not just for safety but to use, and those features may in one way or another enhance the use of the vehicle.

And yes, they build vehicles with explosives in them, and those do drive around if there is a use, everything from military tanks, to construction and mining ops have vehicles with bombs in them. While MUCH more dangerous, the tradeoffs are considered worth it.

So you look at the whole package.

I want yellow blinkers on all vehicles. Something as basic as that is not required. Fast cars are allowed. And now we are not only saying that a different design shouldn't even be allowed to be considered, but the folks considering the design should be "condemned"?

Heads up - Tesla, and eventually others are pushing HARD on greater autonomy. I wouldn't be surprised if more and more designs started reducing the number of passenger controls. Airplanes have had this happen too. Spaceships same thing, crew dragon a lot fewer buttons. They were condemned for that as well.

My own guess? Tesla is too far ahead here (ie, their AI supplement is not yet ready), and may get reeled back.

But they are pushing this way. They don't want side mirrors, they want cameras as an example, and yes, folks condemn them for that too even through the fuel savings would be incredible. Folks condemned them for their "dangerous" batteries. They've been condemned repeatedly, but their death rates per mile driven are far better than the news stories make it seem.

dude, you are so confused. The car design as a whole. A car designed with a bomb in it is a different design than the other civics. Do you not understand that?

This makes my point even more clearly.

If you have Civics with bombs and civics without, and the ones without have a safety result that is higher overall, even if there is some arguable benefit of the bomb (ie, less likely to be carjacked?) if the design of the cars without the bomb results in a better safety result, those cars should be preferred.

I'm going to leave this here I think - I'm not sure who is on HN anymore, but it does feel like the actual engineering type folks are a smaller group, and so normal tradeoff analysis has turned into the outraged / condemn them type yelling.

Let me be crystal clear. If you advocate that a car design that, in total, is 2x safer than another car design be condemned - you deserve total condemnation.

A car might invest a ton in structural safety, and trade that for some cool or sexy features. Be that speed, horrendous visibility or whatever. Some cars this trade results in terrible safety results. Tesla is not one of those yet. There are PLENTY that are.

The irony of course is this adamant view around steering wheels ignores their long history of being an actual safety hazard! Those of us with some memory of early safe issues will remember the data showing that in frontal impacts, steering wheels were being forcibly driven into the chests and bodies of drivers, killing them. There are still issues (usually if folks are too close to the wheel) with skull fractures / hand and wrist injuries etc.

Tesla should simply have to demonstrate that their whole package is safer than other cars being sold (including mustangs and corvettes with zero visibility, terrible handling etc etc).

This idea that you can stick a round wheel in some of these terrible sports cars and hypercars and it makes them safe is the height of stupidity. It's the whole package, traction control, safety cage, crumple zones, emergency braking etc.

We need to condemn the condemners. The don't / can't doers.

Here is an F1 racing wheel - used in some of the highest (not lowest) performance driving.

https://www.popsci.com/f1-racing-steering-wheel-complicated/

Airbus moved away from yolks on their planes as part of a move towards greater automation, with great success. Same arguments were made there BTW.

The market for utilitarian design is high. Tesla's for example have some of the LOWEST injury rates per mile driven. The whole package (which is how this all should be judged) is safer than many cars driving on the roads today.

A design that for example allows someone to drive faster than 10MPH (which clearly reduces safety) should be condemned?

I condemn this type of absolutely ridiculous over the top language use and this ridiculous absolutism.

It's compatible, but if Postgresql wanted to go harder copyleft and switch the license for future releases, they'd need to get pretty broad agreement, and that would be difficult, there are a lot of corps / enterprise players in the ecosystem, and things like (a)GPLv3 are often totally banned. Is GPLv3 software even allowed in the Apple iphone App Store? The Windows Phone app store?

A similar situation in local political health care plans. I did medical billing. Our local govt agency (this was for medicaid level care) required that they only pay 25% of the price of the service. When 90% of your patients are on medicaid, you raise the price so that 25% of price is now what price should be.

But very funny when someone comes in and wants to pay cash. While that would be SO much easier than dealing with the agency - you got to charge them 4x so some politician and HN posters can go on about how much money the govt "saves".

I just wish prices (cash paid) had to be posted publicly.

Sure.

The Elastic license is also a change from Apache 2.0, and is also not an OSI approved license as far as I am aware.

Doesn't the elastic license specifically limit use of software to basic features, prohibit modification of licensing control mechanisms etc. I haven't dug through it, but it seemed FAR FAR different than a normal open source license.

One question I had - is the Elastic license transferable? Ie, if you run a startup and are bought out with an asset buyout, can you transfer the stack including the Elastic licensed software to the acquiring party (assuming in the interim elastic has ceased to offer new elastic licenses so they can't get their own). Can you sell software built out on elastic licensed code and transfer the elastic license to the users so they can also use it? Or does everyone need to go back to elastic to get these licenses.

A lot of discussion about being open, but reading the details - seems far from open at first glance.

I think they got tired of having folks argue with them about the license.

In short though - was developed at berkeley so released under a BSD license. The license has served them well (there are a lot of commercial entities supporting postgresql development, and lots of others with various forks). And finally, it would be hard to change at this point and they don't see a gain.

A note - in contrast to Elastic, there is no one copyright holder with postgresql. So this makes it much hard to get a relicense to for example a situation where one commercial entity has a special right to the terms / relicensing power.

The Elasticsearch SPPL is going to be pretty incompatible with many or most contributors business models and personal needs. The question is will the community harmonize around 1-2 forks or will the there not be enough critical mass in a fork to keep things going.

PostgreSQL is explicitly NOT GPL (it's basically a very permissive BSD / MIT style license). More here: https://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/

See section and links for "Why not the GNU General Public License?"

It's not GPL for some of the same reasons described here and enterprise does like it.

I think what's been seen is after videos of the protests and buildings burning etc there is a crush of non-protestors running to get guns.

Locally there may be also a sense that at least in some jurisdictions policing has decreased and/or crime has increased - ie, you are more on your own now - faith in govt is maybe a bit diminished.

And now of course some of the right wing protestors are showing up heavily armed - but I think they always bought guns because they often seem like gun nuts.

Why does facebook do this rather than let third party advertisers advertise? I thought they got most of their money from third party advertisers, not selling their own products.

Note - gun sales are very strong in the US. Antifa / BLM / Armed protestors.

Is this serious - crawling with starlink sats? At night I'm really not noticing starlink sats even on earth. What I'm noticing is MASSSIVE light pollution.

For an article about looking up with the human eye at the stars, the hit on starlink sats is so weird.

Starlink is probably going to be what makes internet initially possible on marks, may even be part of the mars - earth backhaul network, probably spacex will be helping host space based observation platforms (no dust / no atmo). etc.

Very nice.

Did they migrate into Amazon RDS while doing this? For smaller projects I've stopped doing the self managed postgresql thing. The pricing is higher (75%?) for RDS for some use cases but can be worth it.

Going to try RDS Proxy next.

They are explicitly pursuing a demisable sat design.

Note - despite other posters claims, this is not a requirement and there are other approaches as well for the safety side here. The most common is to deorbit into the ocean (the sats are maneuverable) with a failure rate and part hazard rate low enough that remaining risk is minimized. I would expect they would deorbit into ocean / near non-populated areas for other reasons as well.

In my space especially with video conferencing people are willing to spend a premium for lower latency for audio / video conferencing links. So there may be a market there (if you can backhaul phone, video, audio conference traffic) where even 10 - 20 ms in savings may be noticable.

Another may be gaming.

Another is as you say planes and ships out of reach of ground stations (very sparse situation however).

I hate suggestion like this - most of the government involvement so far has been negative - don't wear masks, do wear masks and cloth masks are fine (they probably are not). We're going to cancel doctors license who go out of order in vaccine distribution (so now when the 65 year old drives their 75 year old partner in they can't both be vaccinated).

If anyone actually cared about this there is an EXISTING mechanism to get business to produce pretty much any quantity of anything you want. You pay them money. Instead the government is constantly canceling contracts, seizing products, stopping the sale of products for more than 10% more than historic prices etc.

ALL these steps REDUCE confidence in making a big / high risk investment.

My guess - if we looked at even existing use of the DPA - probably most stuff got made by folks not expert in making it and sat in a warehouse. I'm serious - I want to know how many ventilators made under DPA by rando companies are actually in use?

I've worked in govt contracting - the govt does not get "the best" producers to produce, in situations like this the hands reach out from the experts playing the govt contracting game. Not end of world normally, but with lives on the line some more standard approaches would be refreshing.

We use a fair number of google products, and you can turn on a lot of enhanced protection, and many businesses do. This means even password protected / private URLs may generate scans from what I've seen. I'm not sure how they actually fingerprint files (maybe locally) but it seems pretty broad

This seems to work across a lot of google products (gmail, drive, chome etc) so it scoops up a ton.

More here:

https://security.googleblog.com/2020/05/enhanced-safe-browsi...

Not sure if this is related to safe browsing. We also can turn on more scanning and other features of all email users.

The key though, if you allow users to PUT files onto your S3 (even private / signed in) then google may scan them. That means if your user uploads a suspicious file to a trouble ticket system, if there IS a virus in there and google sees it, wham. Obviously most folks will segregate those uploads off into their own s3 bucket by user/account to avoid contamination, but you really have to be careful not to hose viruses AT ALL on your key domains.

A while back before AWS was so popular their support at lowest tier developer accounts was totally ridiculous. I'd messed something up, out of their scope to fix (they could have just said nothing wrong with X). Instead some AWS engineer with my permission jumped in and got application side to fix things up and walk me through the configs etc.

What!! So I paid $50 for one month for support, and got a full on support expert who'd bill (at least in my world) $250+/hr. Honestly, the support cost was maybe even LOWER, and I'd just signed up for support to submit my ticket.

Google does not care. You GSuite calendar is not accessible on google home devices etc etc despite TONS of requests from paying customers. That same calendar integrates easily with ALEXA from amazon. Huh? Someone is paying attention, and it's not google.

I do like project based permission / approach in GCP. I like a lot of other things there too. But I've had stuff running for years on AWS without issue - so the trust with AWS keeping things going mostly is there.

Tell to the folks paying for the Maps API who built businesses around it.

What a scam. Has amazon EVER raised the price of an AWS service?

Tell that to folks building on the paid maps API's.

I don't think AWS has every really screwed anyone. My simpleDB kept running long after I even remembered it used simpledb! I can't even remember a price increase, much less a 10X gotcha one with no grandfathering! Ouch!

Google will kill your account, change pricing etc much more commonly than AWS. The nightmare of google+ and being forced to jam a profile onto everything - they give two sh** about user stability / happiness on some things if the command comes down to blow the house up which it seems to periodically.

That is interesting! I'd always been confused WHY Apple with its focus on audio / video wasn't pushing more here for some better open standards.

The AV1 support is obviously a step though in the right direction.