533 karma · joined October 8, 2019
Further, as an avid user of Ubuntu, who reaps the benefits of millions of work hours of Debian &/or Ubuntu employees, I'm ok with advertising whose source code I can audit, and modify even.
And to think that the majority of dissenters are commenting from their closed source Macs & iPhones, or their equivalent commerical competitors, on Google funded browsers tracking their every click, is all a little ironic
I like this fake alternate strawnan universe where actual dildos head Brave, where last ditch efforts to save a silicon valley VC funded startup is to push wherever it is you dream they'll push. Because burning everything to the ground is par-for-the-course, for both VCs and entrepreneurs in the valley?
Or - this is classic FUD-ing, backed by exactly zero evidence
Facts:
1. Brave's tracking degree is little to none, compared to Google/Microsoft(edge).
2. Brave is the only browser that splits ad revenue with the user, and pays creators a higher percentage, compared to the AdSenses of the world. On top of that, brave ads aren't distracting, are generally of high quality and non intrusive to the browsing experience.
I've personally earned more than $50 in aggregate this year using brave, and tipped a 100% of that to sites and content I consume often. Both the creators and I are happy costumers of brave.
No - that's the highly editorialized, average "opinion" of Maddow, Lemon,... PBS is much better at not indoctrinating their audience on conspiracies
Did Russia hack the British elections recently?
Did Russia plant Tulsi into the DNC as a Trojan horse. Clinton seems to claim so.
Edit: The Russians have caught wind of this comment, and frantically down voting it, lest the media uncovers them lurking on HN
We should be upvoting more substantive writing, making serious accusations on racism should be backed up by real evidence, not quotes and opinions of someone parroting the author's narrative
But you'd go to a competitor who hasn't published a blog post, whose internal code you haven't audited and simply presume is just fine?
In plaid's defense, lack of performance tuning isn't necessarily a lack of security focus.
The MAIN takeaway here is simple - phone prices have crept up from $600-ish in 2013 to $1000-ish in 2019 without a commensurate increase in value to the end-user. To the extant that Apple has had to indulge in planned obsolescence [1] speaks volumes to stagnation of actual value delivered to the user.
This is just price gouging from [Apple, Google, Samsung] and the customers are right in sending them the signal of "don't care". I've personally set the max price/budget allocation to my phone at $600/two-years, and have been able to buy fabulous devices with high DXO-mark cameras, and great Antutu-speed benchmarks without breaking the bank. You should too.
Is that because animation software is Mac only? Is there any hardware or software benefit unique to the Mac that they (animation software developers) rely on?
See download sizes here [1], if they remind you electron app sizes [2], it's because flutter is a slimmer (not by much) Chrome.
Flutter will suffer from huge update sizes like electron, but may be faster out of the box, and slimmer (not by much) in RAM. However, using Carlo [3] or Lorca [4] can yield similar benefits, without learning dart, or dealing with brand new flutter edge cases solved years ago elsewhere. In my opinion, flutter is not yet a better mouse trap for desktop apps, and even for mobile, ionic 4 is plenty performant
[1]: https://github.com/flutter/samples/releases/tag/gallery-v2.0
[2]: https://central.github.com/deployments/desktop/desktop/lates...
However, I agree with you that their business acumen is lacking, pricing at 25-50% over their best quality competitor would have vastly expanded the market, and their bottom line. But someone is advising them to be the Hermes/Versace of computers and somehow making business sense to decision makers, so this is what we get.
Yes - when you need a few thousand of these to render your SFX, you shop around for alternatives. Then some startup that recently built a cloud render farm for this exact use case will save you the CapEx, give you a manageable OpEx and prove this Op-Ed wrong. SFX studios are legendary for hiring and firing elastically, you think they care about Apple hardware lock-in?
Also, if you're a software business built on Apple, do some research - they'll fuck you over in a heartbeat. Maybe they'll block you on the Mac Store for using a private API [1], or retroactively apply a bogus rule [2] if they want to compete with you. Control your destiny by moving off an exclusive-Apple strategy
[1]: https://m.slashdot.org/story/362994
[2]: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2...
Apple can win at this game, all they need to do is price it 25% over the best-quality competitor, as the market is willing to pay a premium for Apple's brand and perceived quality. Apple's distinct advantage is not in engaging in self cannibalizing price wars with the cheapest competitor, but being at the intersection of "High Quality " and "Affordability"
But whoever's advising this pricing needs to be held accountable for their input. Unless they really intend for this to be a vanity purchase, like a Hermes bag. Just remember, none of the designer brands have market caps comparable to mass market brands, so what is sold Apple upto?
2. The underlying code of the web's infrastructure is available on a royalty-free basis, and shall remain as such!! There's immense benefit in maintaining this equal-opportunity status-quo.
The proposed new tax is on top of everything in place, just to placate political rhetoric about big American tech "getting away".
This is entirely a nationalist, protectionist tax Spain is levying, and it's not rooted in reason
Donald Trump is leading a charge to stop unfair taxation of American tech companies abroad, while they openly work to get him out of office by any means necessary.
With that disclaimer I can safely contend that Google/MSFT will not be interested in this. LaTex is for academic typesetting, with a special focus on math-y content. Even with WYSIWYG, every now and then one will need to get into the weeds of Tex syntax, which is simply not for the average computer user.
As for academia, they will not pay a Google/Microsoft for LaTex use when they might as well use Lyx/Kile or their favorite editor with some syntax highlighting support for Tex. And unlike regular note taking, academic writing isn't so spontaneous that you start editing your IEEE manuscript on the pot, while on your phone.
My guess is that the FAANG tribe have little incentive to commercialize this, and hence acquire it
Frankly, I would say that you are a hypocrite.
1. You charge $1.99 for an app that strips revenue streams off content creators, while simultaneously expecting people to pay you for your work. The equivalent would be someone simply taking your impending Android apk, cleaning out the part where you get paid and putting it up for free download. a.k.a piracy
2. Your TOS [1] is a draconian piece of work, implying that the mere act of linking to your site requires your permission (which is obviously inaccurate). However, you have the gall to strip parts of someone else's content in an automated fashion? I'm certain you are violating ToS of podcast creators by doing what you do, and I hope they hold you accountable
Even the list of podcasts you currently support (like ones from NPR) are publicly funded, universally acclaimed and mostly ethical in their labeling of ads. You are not a net benefit to the ecosystem