If Apple is so bad at this that they have to charge 30%, they should have failed in the free market to a competitor that can do the same or better for 3%. However, Apple has prevented that, not by being better or cheaper, but by implementing DRM that locks users out from having a choice (and the market as a whole ended up being a duopoly with cartel-like pricing).
Whether Apple can be cheaper isn't really the point (they should be, digital services are a very high margin business). It's that they're anti-competitive to the point that the market for paid apps and in-app payments became inefficient (in a financial sense).
You are trying to tell me that credit card processing fees are negligible, software engineers work for free, advertising doesn’t require overhead, etc…
I guess that kind of thinking that everything is basically free is why alot of startups just fail so easily.
Your profit is whatever your revenue minus costs. Plenty of app stores have operated in the red that we know this isn’t trivial to get right. It definitely is nowhere near negligible as patent asserted. I’m frustrated by how dumb HN is getting lately.
I don’t really think that’s true with AI in the mix. Yes, they won’t be watching those specific movies, but AI will be trained on them and even use them as context. You could generate a new updated movie set between ANH and ESB with AI versions of the original actors when they were young and alive. Cinema could start to get really interesting, and anything new is just a remix of the old anyways (we just build on what we have done much faster and more cheaply).
When I was a kid, I dreamt a lot about what happened between those two movies, since Star Wars came out when I was 2 and ESB when I was 6. There were some comics sure, but I felt ripped off we didn’t get to see what happened between them (yes, the holiday special was a thing, but it didn’t help much). A lot of weird dreams on my part (which incidentally is probably closer to how AI works these days, just remixing my memories, adding some new details, and the fidelity isn’t as good as the original).
Did the kid actually have to acquire US citizenship via naturalization or did it just take 2 years to prove that they were a citizen? Those two cases are really different.
Even if you don’t have confirmation and proof that you are a citizen (eg by having a US passport), you are still bound by rules if you happen to be a citizen anyways (eg you have to file/pay US taxes). So a lot of kids find out later in life that they are actually natural born US citizens and have been evading US taxes illegally.
No, the problem for a language server is incremental performance, not batch performance. Although there are a lot of bad implementations out there that just reparse the entire buffer on each edit (without the error recovery benefits an incremental parser would give you).
> No, the problem for a language server is incremental performance, not batch performance
"When something is fast enough, people start to use it differently" - Linus Torvalds.
Make your parser able to parse the current file at 30FPS and you do not need incremental parsing anymore nor error recovery. That is probably part of the idea here.
Here that can go both ways - SIMD parsing can allow handling arbitrary changes in reasonable time for files below like maybe 100MB (i.e. everything non-insane), whereas incremental parsing can allow handling small changes in truly-arbitrary-size files in microseconds. A trade-off between better average-case and worst-case time. (of course the ideal thing would be both, but that's even more non-trivial)
It’s not good enough. Incremental parsers can save trees across edits, and you can hang type information off of those trees, so you just aren’t saving parsing time, you are saving type checking time as well. Even if you have a super fast batch parser, you are screwing yourself in other areas that are actually much more expensive.
The runtime cost of type checking is highly dependent on the type system / meta-programming complexity of your language.
For simple languages (Golang?) with a pretty well designed module system: it should be doable to reach ~500KLOC/sec (probably even 1MLOC/s in some case) so more than enough for an interactive usage.
And for complex languages with meta-programming capabilities: they are indeed slow to type check.
But are also a giant pain in the butt to cache without side effects for incremental parsing. It is 2025 and clangd / intellisense still fail to do that reliably for C++ codebases that rely heavily on template usage.
So it does not seem a so-crazy approach to me: It is trading a complexity problem for a performance one.
Ya, but not being intact doesn’t mean completely destroyed. I just don’t think the Europeans will ever trust the USA enough again to let them have a close relationship, even if Trump’s presidency ends with the US still a democracy.
Individuals (sole traders, contractors etc) can claim VAT rebates. You don’t have to have a lawyer or an accountant if you’re prepared to figure out the rules yourself.
The irony is that China was actually against Russia into the 90s (Sino Soviet split was still on), and nationalism was taboo also because too many people were burned by the cultural revolution. Changes were made after 1989 to encourage more nationalism, and that all culminates with Xi (China and Russia are still frenemies, but mutual antagonism with the USA has brought them closer).
Japan led in automation in the 90s before the rise of China put a stop to those investments paying off. Now China is making those same investments at a time when the tech is much better. America could solve its manufacturing problem in the future just by importing China automation tech.
It is theoretical, I also doubt China would help the USA develop like that directly and lose its advantage. We would have to trade something really valuable in return (like modern semiconductor or jet turbine tech).
America already makes high value goods in China and takes most of the value from them since they did the IP and the software for those products. China desperately wants in on that, they are no longer happy making the product while America takes most of the profit! They would swap places with America in a heartbeat if that’s what Trump is offering.
reply