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

At least in Europe the gdpr still counts, even when you don't use cookies but fingerprinting.

So if you use this information you still need to disclose it and process data in accordance with the law.


In my case, the site reports "The technique is called browser fingerprinting. It is legal everywhere."

It is definitely not legal in Europe, when used to track individual users. The consent pop-ups are not only about cookies.


Yes, this is how European social welfare works. And it is fantastic! Because the entirety of the EU is benefitting from it. Polish people have larger spending power, interesting and safe places to visit, etc.

This is not a "present" given to Poland. This is ensuring a better life for all Europeans.


In the 1980s, EU money was flowing to Spain, Portugal and Greece. And people complained about that too.

But the result is inarguably positive. Those countries had only recently become democracies after decades of military dictatorships or otherwise unstable third-world style governments. Today they're the most dynamic economies in the EU in many respects, and their democracies are well established and functioning.

The EU doesn't get nearly enough credit for how it transformed the continent. People have forgotten how nearly all European countries were in a very bad shape after WWII. Fascists had remained in power in Spain and Portugal. Soviets were orchestrating communist takeovers in countries like Italy. It's a small miracle that the liberal democratic economic order won so quickly and decisively.


>Today they're the most dynamic economies in the EU in many respects

In what sense are they "dynamic economies"? Their GDP per capita has barely increased at all over the past two decades, they're mired in debt, and haven't produced a single new company that's significant on the global stage.


Spain is currently the fastest growing state in Europe, is the largest source new job creation in Europe, and is currently benefiting from its large scale investments in renewables and grid infrastructure sheltering it from the worst of the Iran war.

Inditex, Mercadona, Movistar?...

So your measure for success is how people get to put a piece of paper in a box every four years whilst their issues get ignored.

What... are you really belittling democracy

That’s not what I said. I said there are more important things to increase the wellbeing of the citizens of a country than democracy. In other words, a country can use democracy as a tool to destroy itself.

Maybe. But I don't think you will find any of those things without strong democracy.

Counterpoint: China from Deng and onwards is an autocracy with rapidly improving material conditions

Its population will halve this century thanks to their autocratic policies so we’ll see how that unfolds

Singapore says hi.

which things? care to be more specific?

That is incorrect for Portugal. We didn't took part on the WWII and came out with a rich country that kept growing on double-digits. Eventually it was attacked simultaneouly by the US/Russia proxies for 10 years until 1974.

It was after that US/Russia sponsored this communist takeover of our country that the new puppet governments have thrown the natives into extreme misery until someone from the EU decided to reduce the levels of corruption and misery. We simply swapped one master for another and hasn't been good for our land.

So please don't compare our country to whatever "solutions" brought by the same entities who caused our problems in the first place. We needed almost 50 years to remove socialism from this country and reduce the venezuelan/cuban style poverty forced upon us.


Spain is often given as an example of a failed economy ruined by socialists. GDP per capita is basically flat over the last 2 decades, $30K. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/esp/spa... vs Poland that tripled or let's say Israel that had the same GDP as Spain and now has double.

> The EU doesn't get nearly enough credit for how it transformed the continent. People have forgotten how nearly all European countries were in a very bad shape after WWII.

The EU is very turning major capital cities into complete shitholes. My city of youth, Brussels, is now a 3rd world hellhole where religious extremism (and not a christian one) reigns undisputed king and where drug-dealing cartels are running the show.

I fled that city.

> It's a small miracle that the liberal democratic economic order won so quickly and decisively.

We'll see how well the economic order "won" once there won't be enough money to pay for pensions and once islamists are going to take political power. 25% of Brussels is now bearded men and veiled women (and that number was near to 0% when I was a kid: so in my lifetime my native city turn from 0% to 25% muslims): if you think this shall lead to anything else than the "economic order" we're seeing in islamic country, you're a fool.

France is currently importing about 500 000 people per year, mostly from muslim countries, and it's estimated only 10% of these people are ever going to find work.

I find the EU's stance totally myopic and they're destroying the western culture with totally uncontrolled immigration, while handing the keys to the kingdom to religious extremists.

You mention WWII and fascists and communists: we got rid of those. But only to replace those with islamist extremism, which have already taken several cities, like Brussels.

So, no, the war against deadly ideologies ain't done yet and it's way too early to claim victory.

It's also quite thick to claim amazing "dynamic economies" when in USD the EU hasn't seen any grow since the 2008 financial crisis, at the same time where both the US and China skyrocketed. The EU is barely countering inflation and it's doing that at the cost of massive public debt increase.

I don't have the same reading of you at all as to what's happening in the EU.

I see the EU falling into both irrelevancy and islamism (btw islamism is already a major talking point of the next french elections, where two candidates are critizicing the "entrisme islamique" for the subject becomes very hard to ignore).

No growth since 2008 (in USD and inflation adjusted). Hardly any company in the Top 100.

A failure of a continent.


I’m not interested in debating the anti-Islam diatribe. If your lived experience is that “bearded men and veiled women” have destroyed the halcyon paradise of your childhood, then that’s fundamentally a nostalgia-based emotional argument.

But I’ll clarify that I wrote that Spain, Portugal and Greece specifically have become dynamic economies in the context of the EU. Spain has grown at a consistent 3% for a decade. Of course the far-right argues that it’s the wrong kind of growth because it’s fueled by immigration (backwards-looking political movements prefer zero growth and a shrinking population if it means less people of the color they don’t like).


The bearded men have increased the crime rates in Spain, France, UK, Germany, Sweden etc. This is crystal clear if you look up statistics. Just in the last week there was a Aloha Snack Bar stabbing in Barcelona. Poland has low crime rates specifically because they have strict border controls.

You are free to personally visit Brussels to see what a shit hole it is.


Exactly how do you believe their borders are more strict given that they’re in Schengen? And how is the EU to blame for Belgium’s immigration policies but not Poland’s?

I'm getting strong H. P. Lovecraft vibes here. Just so you know.

I think this is the hidden reason why the American alt-right/far-right/MAGA/techbro types hate the EU with so much apoplectic rage. For all its problems, big-picture-like it actually works to gradually coalesce a huge rich continent with a bigger population than the US into something increasingly more coherent, and if it continues to work it will mean that the Western world now has two heavyweight leaders, not one. For people who tend to view the world as a giant zero-sum dominance competition, this is of course a big threat. One more big player = one more competitor.

(The techbros hate it for a different, if related, reason - they aren't nearly as successful at capturing regulators, astroturfing and controlling discourse, and otherwise taking charge of that second entity as they are with the hapless US federal government).


> (The techbros hate it for a different, if related, reason - they aren't nearly as successful at capturing regulators, astroturfing and controlling discourse, and otherwise taking charge of that second entity as they are with the hapless US federal government).

I'd propose a different reason - the techbros disassociate with the EU because if someone want to work in tech that means getting fairly intimate with US culture, companies and markets. There is a reason this conversation is happening on a message board backed by a US company (moderated to US standards, I might add) - the Europeans don't have the ecosystem to sustain something similar.

If Europe were capable of building the ecosystems needed to fielding a large number of competent tech companies then techbros would start turning up there too.


Don’t make shit up about people you don’t understand.

>American alt-right/far-right/MAGA/techbro

Bucketing these all together doesn’t even make sense. A “techbro” has completely different reasons to dislike the EU (regulatory regime unfriendly to tech startups) than some MAGA focused on US competitors.

As someone from the tech industry, I’m disappointed in the EU as it falls further and further behind on innovation. I love the EU though and frequently visit it (which is not something a MAGA would do).


Europe is the birthplace of democracy, socialism, feminism and secularism.

Ofcourse Christ conservatives hate it.


And remember Christianity come from the middle east.

Jesus would have foreseen the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz before launching a war of choice on the Persians.

Good thing we are a Democratic Republic :)

All non-monarchies in Europe are republics too. It’s by far the most common type of democracy. It’s unclear to me why some Americans insist on making a distinction that doesn’t exist.

So you’re taking from others who earned it and give it someone that didn’t? Got it.

As noted in the other comment Poland is not even getting that much money per capita, it’s just a fairly large country.

They are still getting half of what Belgium is getting and unlike the overwhelming majority of bureaucrats in Brussels Polish farmers actually produce something useful.


Yes, in the EU they call it 'sharing'

That's like the entire point of the EU yes, most people agree it's better than what we used to have, considering how it went in 1914 and 1939 for example

Money is a claim on future work - it only works if the system works.

So few people understand this about money. That it's not a resource. It's just accounting system.

This is what capitalists literally do with workers. It's not like capitalists are creating anything valuable, they're just leeches extracting wealth.

I rather have workers get the money than more corporate welfare.


> It's not like capitalists are creating anything valuable,

Some capitalists create enormous value, some destroy it, some are essentially passive recipients of returns generated by others.

Capitalists provide real productive functions like capital allocation, risk-bearing, founding, governance, monitoring, etc.


No capitalists just provide money, something other entities can as well. Often better too.

Capitalists are completely useless when they have no workers, so I don't understand your points outside of "wow capitalists require a lot of workers to exist."

Hence the rush towards LLM systems, the dream of perpetual labor machine is too enticing.

There is also no risks for capitalists, do we live on the same planet where the stated US economic policy isn't to socialize the risks and privatize the gains?


> There is also no risks for capitalists

So you argue no capitalists ever lost money? It happens all the time, the risk is real.


I would recommend you to not use these, if you are not willing to absorb the risk.

Luckily there is still a significant market for the services.


Some human always gets to be the certified fall guy for non-compliance. Maybe the legal agent can help structure the company so that is an ignorant lower level accountant and not the CFO.

Currently we don't know the risk, so it is kind of hard to absorb.


Decade-old spoilers for "How I Met Your Mother" ... but there's a character who has that kind of job, as a legal meat-shield.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u62HptZ6TE


I don't think commits per se puts pressure on the infrastructure.

More likely pulls and pushes, and, naturally, the ci minutes they identify as the main issue.


But CI only increased by a factor of 2 since last year. Did they really not foresee that happening? And how does that affect git and api operations.

It really shouldn't. The technical summary they released[1] is a very interesting read from a software engineering perspective. It seems to be blindsided by the increased traffic and gives stats related to commits/PRs (which should be relatively cheap for github to process) without any insight into their web traffic or details on how much actions are costing them. If they were super transparent they'd release information about their request response time and resourcing to fulfill that.

Their current path to resolution is to migrate their codebase to a new language[2], continue to drop their inhouse ops for Azure resources and get off MySQL. Maybe one or two of those steps are legitimately a good idea - I don't have an inside scope - but technology migrations are always fraught with issues. It's quite possible these changes are just a result of them vibe-coding a mature codebase into a new language.

1. https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/an-update-on-...

2. I'll grant that Ruby isn't the best language to use as scale but I think we're all old enough to realize that language choice is far less impactful on performance than code quality.


Azure’s core hypervisor orchestrator was half-baked at launch and it has never been fixed. This long read blog series explains a lot for me — for example, why the FedRamp certification program was never able to get a straight answer from Azure about how they handled secrets.

https://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporize...

https://www.kunalganglani.com/blog/microsoft-fedramp-failure...


Re 2, I would generally agree and there is a lot that can be done with caching. However, since writing services in Rust and Golang, there is whole other tier in speed. Architecture matters, code quality also matters, but Golang and Rust help a lot in making very fast services.

Yeah I don't disagree. To clarify. Rust, Golang etc - they give you a very noticeable advantage when it comes to writing good performant software with the assumption that you're putting in the effort on the design side. But poorly written Rust is likely going to be indistinguishable from poorly written Ruby.

> migrate their codebase to a new language[2], continue to drop their inhouse ops for Azure resources and get off MySQL

The recent blog post you're linking to mentioned moving data only for webhooks off MySQL, not all relational data used by the entire site; and moving "performance or scale sensitive code out of Ruby", again not the entire codebase.

Do you have an official source suggesting these migrations are more comprehensive than that?


I do not know - this is the only source I'm aware of and the wording is vague enough that the above is just my interpretation of it. It could be highly targeted but the manner of wording indicates a strong preference that smells of a large migration.

What part of the wording gives you that impression? On these topics, the post literally just says the following:

"bottlenecks that appeared faster than expected from moving webhooks to a different backend (out of MySQL)"

"Similarly, we accelerated parts of migrating performance or scale sensitive code out of Ruby monolith into Go" (in a paragraph specifically about "critical services like git and GitHub Actions")

Both of those sound highly targeted to me!


> While we were already in progress of migrating out of our smaller custom data centers into public cloud, we started working on path to multi cloud. This longer-term measure is necessary to achieve the level of resilience, low latency, and flexibility that will be needed in the future.

That paragraph read, to me at least, that the initial targeted changes were just the tip of the iceberg and that much heavier lifting than initially budgeted were now in scope.


"smaller custom data centers into public cloud" is talking about their Azure migration, so "multi cloud" would almost certainly mean extending a presence into AWS and/or GCP (or maybe others like OCI).

I'm sorry but I really don't see how you're drawing conclusions about this meaning a move off of Ruby and MySQL entirely. That's a huuuge logical leap away from what is written in this post, and you originally stated it in a way that indicated this was a fact.


You could say the same about the Ai. Ai is incredibly well suited for extracting knowledge through chats.

In this regard. A doctor also just have 15 minutes for an interview. An Ai can be with the patient for days leading up to a consultation.

So if we remove this "handicap" this Ai will likely really start to win.


Chat seems like a really bad way to get patient information. You'll miss out on various cues doctors will use to diagnose you. People can get ashamed of their symptoms and may try to hide them.

It’s not good for a doctor to be your best friend. It doesn’t seem any LLM is capable of that emotional distance.

It’s the ER. People aren’t always in a position to “chat” when they go there.

You think current ER people work in complete silence? No words uttered?

You think that they have “days leading up to consultation”? Please don’t be so disingenuous; I’m sure you know exactly what the person you’re replying to meant.

> I’m sure you know exactly what the person you’re replying to meant.

No.

There are a lot of different modus operandi, and you can always find an outlier.

> Please don’t be so disingenuous;

Ditto


Funny that you mention wsl as a great windows feature - the ability to get out of windows.

Wine is a great thing on Linux too…

Wine -> Running Windows programs on Linux

WSL -> Running Linux VM inside of Windows

Wine is more like emulating Windows API behavior on Linux, while WSL is Microsoft throwing their hands in the air and saying "Lets just VM Linux wholesale".

Both aim to avoid Windows, neither replace Linux but instead tries to move more to Linux.


>Both aim to avoid Windows, neither replace Linux but instead tries to move more to Linux.

I don't agree: WSL is an attempt to use programs developed for Linux in Windows. It is clearly for people who want to use Linux programs but don't want the headache of setting up Linux or dual booting.


> WSL is an attempt to use programs developed for Linux in Windows.

Then I'd think it be available as a "right-click > Launch Linux Program" or something like that, like WSL1, rather than the VM approach WSL2 takes which gives you entire environment. Even Microsoft themselves market WSL like that:

> Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) lets developers run a GNU/Linux environment - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/

I agree with your last part though, it's for people who want to use Linux without the headache of dual-booting or managing their own VMs, so they use predefined packaged VMs ala WSL instead.


I guess I was more contesting that WSL is for people to get away from Windows, when it is actually the other way around; it reduces the friction between tools developed to only work on Linux and Windows users, so that the Windows user can stay using just Windows. Back when I used Windows, this was always a point of contention for installing most dev related apps, and trying to use MinGW was such a pain (WSL was broken on my computer then due to Hyper-V being BIOS disabled). I used Linux now on my main computer, but I recently tried WSL on a family member's computer and I can see how if you just do all dev work in WSL, you would never have to go through the process of migrating to an entirely new OS and still get all of the benefits.

Yet again, because it helps avoid windows.

If I run WSL it’s because I try to avoid Linux - but I want to run something that needs a Linux environment. I think the argument about what’s avoiding what is pretty strange.

We are already in the works of removing 2: backoffice software that we moved to an in house react app and a library that has a license fee.

None of these are really because of cost. But more because we can get a superior product by doing so.


Adds should be a tabu word and business model.

It takes people's attention, makes people fat and anxious and generally makes the world a worse place.

Everybody using adds as a part of their business model should feel bad.

As an extention of this there is no moral issues with using add blockers, despite what the businesses living of adds try to tell you.


I agree. Also, Linkedin and CV's shouldn't exist. Self-promotion is gauche.

I don't think this is the slam dunk you think this is. LinkedIn's existence is, in fact, a net negative for the human race.

> how much is more software actually worth to you.

A really misunderstood vibe coding task, especially in more corperate settings, is code removal and refactorings.

I think this is the the fundamental misunderstanding about agentic development: people only see it as a tool to add code.


This smells like BS to me, and I have a bird’s eye view into several enterprises and startups.

LLMs are not being used for code removal or refactorings, it’s either to “hopefully unblock” this large project that has been behind deadline for 12 months, or to just speed up development (somewhat).


Sorry, the "I" should have been an "A" (which I have corrected).

You are right that they are not. And that is the issue, the misunderstanding.


Your example is not from a Jr developer but from a free agent.

I think you will find it very hard to keep a Jr dev in a Corp responsible.

I actually think you will find that it is easier to work with agents at a higher quality and lower legal risk than using Jr developers.

And this is only going to be amplified when it becomes common knowledge that Ai poses less risk to projects, than Jr staff.


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

Search: