Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bluesnews's comments login

They aren't demanding a sale. They are just saying they can't operate in the country if they don't sell.

They have a choice to leave the country or follow the rules.


Let us cannibalize your app because it's so successful at doing X that we can't compete with you. It's a bizarre ultimatum for the owners of the app.


Seems like the policies used by the Chinese government for decade are becoming more internationally popular (for better or for worse..).

I can’t really feel bad about when it’s the same deal they offer Western companies. Well.. to be fair Google or FB couldn’t even get anywhere close to where TikTok is.


Where you launch in a place where the government actually controls your company, well, that's a decision you made.


From the user side, a spec isn't helpful unless it has implementations. And the official implementations are complicated compared to prometheus.


I worked on a team that produced a distributed tracing library. We were tasked with interoperating with OpenTelemetry, or at least figuring out what that means.

My teammate said that at a previous job he wanted to add OpenTelemetry tracing to some C++ code he was working on. He took one look at the reference implementation for C++ OpenTelemetry and decided instead to write his own tracing library that sends gRPC to the OpenTelemetry collector.

It's also worth noting that, at least last time I checked, the reference implementations per programming language are less like reference implementations of some specification, and more like "this is the code you use to do OpenTelemetry in this language."


My understanding is that even in private universities, the magnitude of financial aid available is much less for international students because of the lack of government financing in many cases


Pedestrians outside of cars don't have agency to prevent injury to themselves from cars.


Situational awareness shouldn't be discounted.


I was hit by a car once, due to the driver's lack of situational awareness.

I was turning from a major road into a minor road, a car was stopped at the exit to that minor road, but they failed to look in my direction, and pulled out into me.

My bike was a write-off, fortunately I was uninjured — they had started from stationary, so probably less than 10 mph when they hit me, and I always wear a helmet.


Given the disparity of outcomes, I've always been vigilant of misbehaving drivers. This served me well as a bicycle messenger. Yes, drivers are responsible for violations of the official laws, but ultimately as cyclists we should seek to have maximum awareness. Otherwise you are surrendering agency to people who text while driving.


My kid was bumped recently, by a similarly unobservant driver. Fortunately unharmed. I don't think the solution is reducing traffic density in my town, however, through taxation. Rather, encouraging accountability and discouraging distraction.


Watched it today and it was fun! Not a "great" movie but enjoyable.


Even just reducing traffic, noise and pollution is a pro.


You can't reduce the demand for going to work or shopping for groceries. Arguably the real problem is we've put too much in too small a space.


No, but it does help incentivize people to do those things using transit, or at non-rush hours and gives less traffic to everyone else.

It doesn't work if there aren't alternatives, of course. But NY and London do have them.


I can not imagine there is a statistically relevant number of people that travel to Manhattan to specifically to grocery shop.


Pay for women is on the rise and exceeds men in many metropolitan areas already. I don't really buy the worthless college degree topic argument.


you should provide a source(s) for claims like this…


We're just in a really bad "liquid" economy right now, so it's easy to feel that narrative of "college degrees are useless".

They aren't useless, but as tuition rises it is inevitably going to be a worse investment. Not to the point where trades are worth its equally annoying but different kind of annoyance, though. Pay depends on unions, and get into trade unions is anything but a meritocracy.


Well, there's a couple different things a degree can be used for.

If you actually use specific things you learned, it's useful in the way that training and certification is useful.

If you don't, it's mostly just an indicator of "this person is at least this smart". Which only really matters to the extent that employers use it to save time on interviews.


Could you expand on this?

I don't like ORM because in my experience you inevitably want full SQL features at some point but not sure if you have the same issues in mind or not


ORM is for object-relation mapping. Go is not object-oriented language and OOP-patterns are not idiomatic Go, so using ORM for Go cannot be idiomatic. That's generic answer. As for more concrete points:

1. Mapping SQL response to maps/structs or mapping maps/structs to SQL parameters might be useful, but that's rather trivial functionality and probably doesn't qualify as ORM. Things get harder when we're talking about complex joins and structs with relationships, but still manageable.

2. Introducing intermediate language which is converted to SQL is bad. Inevitably it will have less features. It will stay in the way for query optimisations. It'll make things much less obvious, as you would need to understand not only SQL, but also the process of translating intermediate language to SQL.

3. Automatic caching is bad. Database has its own caching and if that's not enough, application can implement custom caching where it makes sense.

In my opinion the only worthy database integration could be implemented with full language support. So far I only saw it with C# LINQ or with database-first languages (PL/SQL, etc). C# and Go are like on opposite spectrum of language design, so those who use Go probably should keep its approach by writing simple, verbose and obvious code.


I find libraries like sqlx more than enough. Instead of a full-blown ORM, they simply help hydrate Go structs from returned SQL data, reducing boilerplate. I prefer the repository pattern, where a repository is responsible for retrieving data from storage (using sqlx) using simple, clean code. Often, projects which use full-blown ORMs, tend to equate SQL table = business object (aka ActiveRecord) which leads to lots of problems. Business logic should be completely decoupled from underlying storage, which is an implementation detail. But more often than not, ORM idiosyncracies end up leaking inside business logic all over the place. As for complex joins and what not, CQRS can be an answer. For read queries, you can write complex raw SQL queries and simply hydrate the results into lightweight structs, without having to construct business objects at all (i.e. no need for object-relational mapping in the first place). Stuff like aggregated results, etc. Such structs can be ad hoc, for very specific use cases, and they are easy to maintain and are very fast (no N+1 problems, etc). With projects like sqlx, it's a matter of defining an additional struct and making a Select call.


> Go is not object-oriented language

That is most definitely not true. Go just uses composition instead of inheritance. Still OOP, just the data flow is reversed from bottom to the top.


>> Go is not object-oriented language

> That is most definitely not true.

I think at best, you could say that Go is a multi-paradigm language.

It's possible to write Go in an object oriented style.

It's also possible to write programs with no methods at all (although you'd probably have to call methods from the standard library).

That's in contrast to a language like Java or Ruby where it's actually impossible to avoid creating objects.


Unless you happen to want to warm up the CPU, there is very little Go code that is possible to write that does anything useful without OOP concepts, like interfaces, methods and dynamic dispatch.

Creating objects on the heap isn't the only defining feature how a language does OOP or not.


It goes like this:

1. Software development is a fashion industry.

2. OOP is currently uncool.

3. People who identify as Go programmers don’t want it to be thought of as connected to OOP at all, because then it is uncool by association.


Go has objects, but objects alone does not imply orientation. For that, you need message passing.


He generates doubt around the election result "if I lost, it is because of fraud" and provoked a group of people to attempt the overturn the previous election. Plus more subtle things like election rule changes that reduce democracy in the background.


How does this deal with auth for the backend db when running in the browser?


You can offload authentication to another server and then just use the jwt. Jwt are great in that you can read them transparently and guarantee that they were signed by whatever you trust. It's a bit roll your own but it works well and is very flexible.


CouchDB/PouchDB has very clunky auth so IMO it's better to roll your own auth and either use a reverse proxy with a JWT or else hide the DB behind an API service.


Wouldn't it be the same as any other single page application?


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: