Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dabinat's commentslogin

I noticed Apple’s software quality decline the moment they committed to 1-year release cycles. Because an x.0 release inevitably has issues, it offers less than a year of stability (sometimes only a few months if it takes until x.4 to be fully stable) before things get broken again in y.0. And because Apple stops signing old versions pretty quickly, you’re often stuck on an unstable new version if you take the risk and upgrade.

Additionally, it is hard on all developers (Apple included) to release updates for all of its many platforms on the same day, which IMO reduces software quality across the ecosystem.

(Apple also has the luxury of only supporting the latest OS versions with its software. Customers often expect third-party developers to support a wider range of OS versions and devices than Apple does.)


This should be standard industry practice. Any company above a certain size should contribute financially to all software it depends on.

Which for AI companies would be every public GitHub page to start.

Not to mention GitHub/Microsoft itself.

that's a great point. and make it proportional to how much they make off it. looking at you aws for all the great oss software you sell.

Tell that to the FOSS zealots....

if this was industry practice, licenses like GPL wouldn't have needed to be created.

We used to call this “buying an enterprise license”.

Trump is a man who will push boundaries further and further until someone physically stops him from doing so. But you don’t need to justify anything if you have full control over people who would normally investigate, prosecute or restrict such things.

Then you put your thumb on the scale (i.e. Texas) so you don’t cede power to the other party in the midterms and then you never need to worry about consequences for your entire term.

It’s a bit more of a problem in 2028 but Trump is term-limited so that’s someone else’s problem.


> Trump is term-limited

There's a pretty well established Turkic solution to that. (Change the constitution. Claim the term limit applied to the old republic and it's your first term actually and go about your day)


There's a simpler one: Have Vance run as president with Trump as VP, then Vance immediately steps down on day 1. The Supreme Court will then ignore the intent of the 22nd amendment instead focusing on a narrow interpretation, make up some "this isn't a precedent" one-time ruling that allows it, and ta-da!

Vance would never step down. That man is an opportunist through and through.

You seem to assume that Vance is willing to be Trump's puppet. I don't assume that.

Vance has been willing to ride along with Trump as long as it gets Vance to positions of higher power. But it seems to me that Vance's agenda is Vance, not Trump. I doubt that he'd play that "resign" game. (He might tell Trump that he was going to...)


That would be working as intended, besides the resignation. Any ticket with Trump as VP is putting him next in line, as intended.

The people would be knowingly voting for that, and he would have to win the election of course.

After a review of the amendment, I don't believe it would be a "narrow interpretation" to read the text of the law and apply it.

Are you saying it wouldn't be okay for him to be VP and take the helm if Vance died? I think that would be okay, per my reading.

The deception/switcharoo is a different problem, not really related to running three times. Biden could have made Kamala President Day 1 as well.


Why even have term limits if that is okay?

No one has ever expected a former President to want to become a VP — a lower office.


We'll have to address it if it ever happens. I doubt we're the first to consider it happening, including the folks who drafted the amendment.

I don't really think you're that clever, no offense. Other humans can think of "what ifs" just the same as you.

There's probably a historical record of how they arrived at the language, if you care about that kind of thing.


It wasn't until the 25th amendment (which, you'll note, came after the 22nd) that the vice president was officially the successor to the presidency. So it would be weird for the 22nd to have a "what if" answer to something that wasn't yet itself law

Or have a military takeover or manufacture a crisis. At the very least they will claim election fraud and we saw what happened in Trump 1.0. There are definitely many ways MAGA will (likely) remain in power. Fascists don't give up power without a fight.

Hum hum... Bombing of Libya. Support for ISIS against Al Assad in Syria. Doesn't make what happened today right, but it is pretty myopic to see this as unique to Trump or unprecedented.

This absolutely nothing at all like Libya, where an ongoing civil war resulted in UN resolutions of force.

Snatching a national leader of a country with which the US is not at war, has had zero force authorization, off of that leader's own soil, is completely unprecedented, no matter how bad that leader is.


Not sure if it's really unprecedented, but I think all wars should be like that. Go kidnap or kill the leader but please leave everyone else alone. Also by all means go and capture the US' leader if you think you need to retaliate.

The US president abducting a foreign head of state without any congressional authorization, and you are unsure if it's unprecedented?!

Wars should not be the unilateral whim of an uncountable dictator, ever. They should not be started by the US on pretenses that continually change, have not been clearly stated to the American people or Congress, and that make zero sense to anyone involved.

The most clear explanation I have heard that makes any sense at all for this behavior is that Marco Rubio thinks he can ride this to the presidency because he knows it will be popular with a large chunk of Latin Americans, even if it is inexplicable to most Americans.

Regardless of the logistics of how wars should be conducted, the destruction of the US constitution inherent in this action is treasonous to our country's ideals.



One thing I’ve learned is that you should be wary of spending too much time on things that customers don’t see. Customers don’t care about backend engineering unless it results in benefits they can actually see, and if you spend too long on invisible features they’ll think your platform is stagnant and move somewhere else.

    > ...you should be wary of spending too much time on things that customers don’t see
I don't think this is entirely true because there are some things that will help you ship faster like good architecture and a system design that is as simple as possible. These are worth investing, despite their obscurity to the end user, because doing it well can result in a faster pipeline and more stability.

I would say this is fine, provided it’s in service of releasing value.

It’s when the invisible stuff becomes a chore, and blocks or slows down releasing value, such as worrying about micro services.


Someone else paying for your healthcare is literally how insurance works.

Some people are incapable of having empathy about an issue or a group of people unless they have a personal connection to that group or issue. You see it in politicians who are anti-gay rights until they have a child who comes out as gay (e.g. Rob Portman).

> Some people are incapable of having empathy about an issue or a group of people unless they have a personal connection to that group or issue

Yes, these people have a whole party based on this principle.


See also "The only moral abortion is my abortion" for the complete opposite. Where people fail to develop empathy even after it has affected them.

https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-...


This reading was great. Thanks for sharing!

"As the father of a daughter, I understand the need for feminism that I ignored as a son, brother, playmate, classmate, friend, neighbour, landlord, tenant, lover, teammate, colleague, report, supervisor, and fellow citizen."

That's a particularly icky formulation of personal connection, because it has overtones of paternity as property rights.


My TV is the only device on my network with the privilege of being permanently quarantined by my firewall. I gain zero spying or ads and lose no features I actually care about.


It seems a strange anachronism in 2025 that there is still only one language for the web. It really should not have to matter which language I choose to code in. WebAssembly may offer this promise in future, but lack of DOM manipulation is a major design flaw IMO.


I was in a car accident a few years ago that triggered my pre-existing PTSD, so it was a very rough experience. This experience was made worse by the fact that my insurer apparently sold the fact I had been in a crash to third-parties. I could not go anywhere on the internet without seeing personal injury ads, which often featured gratuitous pictures of crashes. This felt incredibly creepy and made a bad experience much worse.


On the day Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed, I started getting Youtube ads for silencers and tactical gear. I guess it follows that people were searching for those sort topics then and I fit some cohort (probably "angry young male"), but it was very unnerving.

Now Youtube mostly shows me ads for fake AI generated products and other scams.


I’m completely unsurprised the holdout is Safari. I really wish Apple decoupled Safari updates from iOS updates. There are legitimate reasons why people might be stuck on an old OS (due to unsupported hardware) or simply not want to upgrade (e.g. because of the recent controversial UI changes). Tying updating your browser to updating your whole OS means web platform changes take much longer to become full baseline.

Plus Safari is often the last browser to get certain features anyway.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: