Amazon DevPay - <AUTHOR> http://aws.amazon.com/devpay/

<comment><USER2> I've used DevPay. My experiences were generally positive. My problems with it were as follows.

1) Amazon doesn't expect one user to buy your service more than one time. Frankly, I didn't expect it either when I started the service or I would have structured it differently. I ended up having to give people free 2nd accounts when they asked for them, since I had no way to bill them for a 2nd account. User would sign up for my service (twitter related), like it, and decide they wanted their other twitter account to also use my service. So they would come back to my site, sign up again with their other twitter user name, I'd send them to Amazon to pay, and they'd get an error, since they had "already purchased that item".

2) Ending the service. When I decided to end the service, I went to try to cancel my devpay billing, so they would just stop billing all my users. This was an email procedure, not a form, which was weird. The email response I got was unsatisfactory to me.

         Per your request, we have denied your product. New customers will not be able
         to sign up for your product any more. Please note, however, that your product
         has customers who have signed up already. These customers will continue to get
         billed for their use of your product. If you don?t want your customers to use
         your application, please contact them and have them unsubscribe from your
         application by going to http://www.amazon.com/dp-applications.

I still have customers paying, since I can't cancel them, all I can do is tell them to cancel themselves. I feel guilty when I see them continue to pay for a discontinued service.

3) I had a general feeling that I was losing some customers due to them not having an Amazon account. I have no actual data to back that up.

All in all, it worked as advertised, but I think I won't use it again.

<comment><USER3> What percentage of your users are still paying yet do not use or do not have access to the service?

I did dev work for a client, service based site, $10.00 a month. I put in some simple tracking reports to let me know a users login history. I found that high percentages of users paid, logged in once, and never logged in again. This struck me as odd because the service was by nature something if you paid for, you would need to login to use it. It was not a trick to get someone to sign up for a site that adds no new value over time.

What was really interesting is the ~14% of users that only logged in once, ever, but still were paying every month on their credit card. 14% seems really high. I wonder if AOL has the same 14% of users not dialing in but paying for dial up still.

I also found ~5% (guesstimate) go right for a chargeback, do not contact support, and do not click the very easy to find "Refunds" tab that allows a one click full account deletion of all data, refund of the partial month, (which was moved to charging at the end of service, instead of up front).

Users purchase habits are indeed strange.

<comment><USER4> Friend of mine told me she didn't cancel her wow account for many months after she stopped playing. it's just something people do, I guess...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It is a shame that not even Amazon is challenging PayPal's monopoly in Europe. Neither Amazon DevPay nor Amazon Simple Pay is available in Europe, and Google Checkout is only available in the UK.

<comment><USER6> Amazon doesn't strike me as being the best of the bunch in terms of i18n, really. Here in Italy, their presence is kind of limited in terms of countries/languages where they are present: only Germany, France and UK. Granted, it's more difficult for a company trucking in physical products to move into new markets, but they seem to be taking their sweet time about it.

Google is a bit better, but still strikes me as very US-centric in some ways.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm confused as to why this is being posted, the service has been available since 2008.

<comment><AUTHOR> I hadn't heard of it before so I figured others might not have either.

More importantly, with the introduction of micro instances, this creates a very low barrier of entry into creating a service behind a paywall. I'm looking to do just that, so I'm also curious to hear other people's experiences with DevPay.

<comment><USER8> In my experience micro instances are not suitable for on-demand services since they have no reserved CPU and frequently stop responding for minutes at a time. They're basically a way for Amazon to sell excess RAM to grid computing customers. On the other hand, I tested them a few days after they first became available and was just experimenting with them as a way to test scalability of a product, so things may have changed since then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks like your customers have to have an Amazon account before they can purchase. How would you sell such a concept to a company if they do not have an amazon account?

Perhaps I am reading it wrong...

""" Embed this link in your web site to allow your customers to purchase your product through Amazon. Customers can sign in with their Amazon.com credentials and select a credit card that is stored in their Amazon.com account. After your customers purchase your application, they are directed back to your web site. """

<comment><USER10> You're reading it right. You send them through Amazon, where they log in with their usual Amazon credentials and can check your rates. When they confirm the purchase, they are redirected back to your page with their authentication tokens as URL parameters.

Without an Amazon account they can't purchase, although in my experiences this hasn't been brought up as a problem by potential customers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The main notion of DevPay is to act "on behalf of" a user, in order to outsource billing to Amazon while using the common AWS APIs. Once a user signs up to your service using DevPay you get a custom Access and Secret Key that's bound to this user and allows you to do all S3 actions while he's billed.

Unfortunately this hasn't been introduced for EC2 - they only allow Paid AMIs and no way to start these for your users without having their AWS credentials.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ahhhh interesting, so it doesn't provide you with a generic payment system, but instead provides you with a way to meter content on S3 or the use of an AMI.

That's still an interesting service model, where you charge users on resource consumption rather than on a per item basis. I wonder how well this would work for an image or video processing service or other similar services.

<comment><USER11> It's been awhile since I checked, but there was also a limitation that meant you could only associate a DevPay ID with an S3-backed AMI, ruling out the more useful EBS-backed AMIs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I guess I had missed this when they rolled it out. It definitely gives me some new ideas about leasing value-added EC2 instances to others.

<comment><USER13> Yes, though be careful since Amazon is slowly rolling out a lot of generic services themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> If DevPay worked outside of the US I would be using it for my product today. Since it doesn't, I'm not. And that is probably not a bad thing because it has caused me to build my software in a much more generic way which means I'm not dependent on EC2 either - and in fact, I'm now saving money because EC2 is fairly expensive compared to the other options I now have, including running on some of my in house capacity where it makes sense.

</comment><comment><USER15> Related post: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=315819>

<comment><AUTHOR> Not much content in that thread. Has any used this since then? I'm interested to hear from people who have used it. I'm not seeing a whole lot about it in general, seems DevPay got some interest in 2008 and then faded off.

<comment><USER15> Understood, but probably would have been better posed as an Ask HN submission.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed. I wasn't aware this was around since 2008 when I initially posted as I hadn't heard of it before. I figured this had already gotten a fair bit of interest so I would just let it go rather than changing it after the fact to an Ask HN post.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Has anyone used this?

<comment><USER17> Yes. We had rolled out a Devpay-backed product called "Cloud Gear" about a year ago and ended up pulling it off the shelf due primarily to two irreconcilable issues: 1\. their accounting process appeared to have some fundamental innacuracies at the time. We tracked the launching of instances and our numbers did not match up with theirs. There was anomalous usage behavior and Amazon eventually admitted there had been tracking glitches on their end - difficult to deliver a service if the underlying accounting can't be trusted. Note: this may have been (likely has been) remedied since but it was problematic around January '10. 2\. As another commenter noted, the signup process for a newcomer was too much to ask of someone who didn't already happen to have an AWS account. And even for those who did it was still a cumbersome hamster maze to put them through and undoubtedly hurt the adoption numbers.

#1 has likely been resolved. #2 is inherent to this type of on-behalf-of arrangement. It is an interesting model and could definitely enable some innovative services. We just found it not ready for primetime when we had tested it back in late '09-early'10.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> What's the difference between DevPay and Paid AMIs?</comment>


Docutils-solarized – A stylesheet for rst2html5.py - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fladd/docutils-solarized

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a first version. I am looking for feedback. Pull requests are very welcome.</comment>


Ask HN: Why would you prefer Emacs over IntelliJ IDEA? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> (note: everything here is scoped to the Java/JVM ecosystem.)

Not to flamebait, but as someone who has worked extensively with large Java / Clojure projects, the only reasons you would use Emacs are

\- when working with a toy project (only one module, no complex dependencies or scoping

\- intertia (or less kindly, stubbornness)

\- ignorance

I have nothing against command line tools. As a linux user, I use Vim whenever possible and it makes sense. But when you are using a large modern Java application, especially one built on a framework (ex Hadoop) with a complex dependency chain and command line classpath manipulation, you are going to go insane trying to manage everything in Emacs. Intellij gives you many huge tools

\- JUnit integration and debugging. I don't know if Emacs in theory supports this, but I am sure no plugin will correctly parse dependency chains and let you debug a test well

\- Finding references and usages. You can find all usages of a method or class across an entire codebase with a few keyboard shortcuts in Intellij. This is hugely valuable when figuring out what teams are impacted by changes. Grepping for usage simply does not cut it (grep for .get()? hah.)

\- Safe refactoring. Want to rename a method? Just refactor it, and everything will compile afterwards, including all usages, and if you want, all superclasses or interfaces which define the method. Incredible.

\- Style and safety warnings. The method recurses infinitely? You're getting the wrong type out of the map? A local variable is unused? Intellij will do them all. Not a chance, unless your IDE is integrated with a real compiler.

I could spend all day filling in this list, but you get the idea. You can waste time playing around writing Java in Emacs, but at the end of the day my goal is getting real work done.

<comment><USER3> Java is one of the langauges emacs has the weakest support for. It really depends on the language.

Emacs is has great C# support with navigation, refactoring, auto-completion (the real thing, not a text match), etc. Combine that with the various helm methods of grepping, helm-cmd-t, and helm-git-grep. Emacs is better than Visual Studio at C#, but you do need to dive down the rabbit hole to really use it well. Emacs blows IntelliJ out of the water when it comes to C#.

First class Java support is possible, but most hard core emacs users could care less about Java.

If you use lisp you get SLIME. Your unit tests are macros, with first class support as any other part of the language. And whatever shenanigans you can dream up will be supported as a first class part of the language, that would require vendor support in IntelliJ.

<comment><USER4> >First class Java support is possible, but most hard core emacs users could care less about Java.

This is surprising to learn considering the two languages are similar in so many ways. Why is this the case?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Emacs works everywhere (windows, linux, mac, etc). It is not specific to any language so I can use it for many projects. It works on remote systems as well as local systems. It has decades of extensions (rmail, slime, org mode, etc). It works for HUGE files, can follow compiler errors, does xref lookups, make a shell unbelievable useful, and is very productive. On some days it seems that at least half of my productivity is due to emacs, especially due to keystroke macros. The only valid complaint I ever heard about emacs was that it is a great operating system which could use a good editor.

On the other hand things like IDEs try to hide everything. You don't know what the build system actually does. You don't know how "resource files" get attached. You are presented with a bunch of menus which focus your attention and skills toward a "standard" style. The Java IDEs are not as bad as the XCode IDE (proprietary files?) but they still hide information.

Your tools shape how you think and what you can think. Emacs is "just there" waiting for your commands. IDEs limit your thoughts and hide things from your understanding.

As a programmer, I need to know how my code calls the operating system, how the operating system runs the hardware, how the hardware fetches and caches, how the bits get turned into voltages, and how the voltages affect the world. Emacs is just a logical extension of the same philosophy.

</comment><comment><USER6> I work in emacs mostly, but have given IDEA (and its varients like PyCharm) a fair shot on several occasions. I keep coming back to emacs. Why, well, in no particular order:

\- extensibility, if I don't like something in emacs I can always change it, less so in IDEA.

\- IDEA has problems with key shortcuts on the dvorak (and other non-querty) keyboard layout, and the devs have no intention of fixing them.

\- plugins. In my experience, language-specific plugins in IDEA tend to either suck or not work so well. Emacs, by comparison has support for damn-near any language, and many of those packages include tasty features which make working in each language a joy. (see the various lisp modes, ensime, and so forth)

\- speed, IDEA is slow, too slow.

\- IDEA is too "mouse driven" for my liking. In emacs, absolutely everything can be controlled via keyboard shortcuts, less so with IDEA.

\- emacs runs in a terminal as well as a gui.

\- emacs has awesome productivity boosting packages like helm, god-mode, projectile and org-mode, which don't have equivalents in IDEA.

\- With emacs I can mold the tool to fit my hand. When I use IDEA, it feels the opposite, like I'm having to change my hand to fit the tool and its way of doing things.

\- ultimately, I don't think an IDE actually brings much to the table. I don't get any value from having the project build tied to a green triangle graphic, and I generally find the usual IDE workflow to be slow and clumsy. Emacs works perfectly, it does exactly what I ask of it and then gets out of the way.

<comment><USER7> It seems that you've aren't aware of many useful IntelliJ features.

> extensibility, if I don't like something in emacs I can always change it, > less so in IDEA.

IntelliJ has extensive plugin API.

> IDEA has problems with key shortcuts on the dvorak (and other non-querty) > keyboard layout, and the devs have no intention of fixing them.

You can tune keymap for you. For example, I don't use default shortcuts.

> plugins. In my experience, language-specific plugins in IDEA tend to either > suck or not work so well. Emacs, by comparison has support for damn-near any > language, and many of those packages include tasty features which make > working in each language a joy. (see the various lisp modes, ensime, and so > forth)

In my experience, emacs works well only with basic language support. If you want something more advanced, for example, completion, error checking, you have much worse experience. In case of rarely used languages, for example, Idris, Agda, etc, they often just don't work.

> speed, IDEA is slow, too slow.

If you don't need smart features, you can turn them off, and IntelliJ will be at least as fast as emacs (google power save mode).

> IDEA is too "mouse driven" for my liking. In emacs, absolutely everything > can be controlled via keyboard shortcuts, less so with IDEA.

It's definitely not mouse driven. AFAIK, everything can be done via keyboard.

> ultimately, I don't think an IDE actually brings much to the table. I don't > get any value from having the project build tied to a green triangle > graphic, and I generally find the usual IDE workflow to be slow and clumsy. > Emacs works perfectly, it does exactly what I ask of it and then gets out of > the way.

I look at IntelliJ not as IDE but as a code navigation/refactoring tool. I can work in emacs if I have about 10s of KLOC, but after this, I need an effective tool to navigate code.

<comment><USER8> Does company-mode completion not work for you?

> In case of rarely used languages, for example, Idris, Agda, etc, they often > just don't work.

Really? My experience is that emacs had the _only_ support for rarely used languages.

> It's definitely not mouse driven. AFAIK, everything can be done via > keyboard.

What about selecting the android device to run an application on when you have multiple devices connected?

<comment><USER7> >Does company-mode completion not work for you?

What do you mean by this?

>Really? My experience is that emacs had the only support for rarely used languages.

In my experience, everything except syntax highlighting often doesn't work. But, anyway these are esoteric languages.

>What about selecting the android device to run an application on when you have multiple devices connected?

I don't use android, but you can create several run configurations, one for each device, and run them via shortcut. My configuration works like this: I set Ctrl+R to show popup menu with available options, then I type the name of the configuration and press enter.

Another action you probably aren't aware of is Navigate to action. It works in a way similar to M-x in emacs. See more here: [https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/help/navigating-to- action.htm...](https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/help/navigating-to-action.html)

<comment><USER9> Side note: Esoteric languages aren't usually languages that follow the dictionary definition of esoteric. That is to say, being uncommonly used doesn't make something an "esoteric language". The term is usually reserved for intentionally strange languages like Brainfuck, Whitespace, Shakespeare, etc.

Idris and Agda are serious languages built to do really amazing things. They're both still pretty young, but have incredible potential.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> (1) I ssh and use the terminal based emacs more than just about anything else.

(2) Macros are awesome, though I'm sure you can set up IntelliJ to use this as well.

(3) I wrote some eLisp to make my life easier, that's the really big advantage to Emacs over most alternatives.

</comment><comment><USER11> \- Works in the terminal

\- org mode

\- has a lot of maturity and innumerable useful extensins/plugins/whatever-we- may-choose-to-call-them

\- can be quite lightweight if desired

<comment><USER12> Do you think that org-mode could be extracted into its own application, or is it too bound to emacs? As a die-hard vim-user-turned-intellij-user (mostly because intellij has the best vim keybindings I've seen), org-mode is the thing about emacs that fascinates me the most.

<comment><USER13> The problem with extracting org-mode into its own application is that a lot of the magic of org-mode comes from emacs. It's not so much being tied up in emacs as sharing and extending the design. By moving org-mode elsewhere, you'd reinvent the wheel and put an artificial division where there doesn't need to be one.

For example, org-babel allows you easy access to any language you have support for in emacs. Same syntax highlighting, same behaviour, same utilities. Improve any of that and org-mode takes advantage of it for basically zero cost.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I routinely program in Python, C, and Haskell, and write prose in Markdown, reST, and LaTeX. I also sometimes use emacs modes for other languages, like QML, YAML, and GLSL. It is very convenient to have a unified interface when using those different languages. This means the only context switching I have to do with different projects is directly related to the language or project itself, not with how to use the different IDE (especially if you haven't touched a project or language in a while). I even have auto-complete setup for the three programming languages.

Another killer feature of emacs is org-mode. With it, I organize all of my tasks for work and my personal life, and create outlines that I can easily export to pdf to send to others. Every org file is just plain text, so you can have all of your notes saved forever as long as you can read ASCII text :) Honestly, org-mode was the original reason I decided to learn emacs; it really is that neat.

I can't and won't try to make an argument about how emacs is objectively superior to certain IDEs for certain tasks. Really, you just have to have an interest in learning it, and hopefully you can increase your productivity with it. I thought learning emacs was fun, and I am always grateful that I can modify my text editor however I like.

</comment><comment><USER15> I've used IntelliJ IDEA on Ubuntu for years and I can't remember it being actually stable at any point in time. There's always been known issues where its freezing, crashing, sometimes requiring complete re-installs. I didn't like the experience of dealing with their support. They'd tersely request me to perform tasks to help them debug (don't have the time to help them debug a commercial product), and they would blame their dependencies stating that those dependencies have known issues on my OS. Their stuff is very stable on mac, but not on Ubuntu. I still put up with the random bugs because its pretty decent overall.

</comment><comment><USER16> I've flirted with IDEs over the years but I've stuck with a combination of Emacs, Terminator, and various commandline tools like bpython.

Here are some reasons I've seen for using IDEs:

\- Autocomplete, syntax highlighting: Emacs has autocomplete and syntax highlighting (there are many themes in Emacs). bpython (an enhanced Python REPL) also has these.

\- Code navigation: Emacs has a lot of nifty keys for zipping around within a document and with iswitchb navigating between documents is really fast. Some of the IDEs offer "goto" functions that will take you directly to where a function is defined, which would be nice.

\- Code discovery: bpython displays function documentation and args; with autocomplete these are really quick. Granted, they're not displayed whenever my cursor hits a function so an IDE would be convenient if you use this all the time.

\- Integrated console, debugger, and VCS: With Terminator I usually have a tab for each project, split into panes for console, logs, etc, etc. They're not displayed in the same window as my code but flipping between Emacs and Terminator is trivial.

\- Refactoring support: Emacs has python-rope mode but it's a bit clumsy. This is one area where an IDE is probably better.

With my setup I have the keystrokes for the original tools (git, pdb, etc, etc.) under my fingers. I have to use these tools outside of the IDE anyway so this way I only have to learn one set of keystrokes.

My Emacs configs live in a Git repo and I can install them wherever Emacs is installed and I have a user directory.

I run Emacs and Terminator on my desktop and edit code directly on VMs and remote systems via ssh[1]. This keeps my desktop free from cruft and lets me develop in a setup that's close to my production setup. IDEs all seem to require that the code be on the same system as the IDE. Maybe they can but the ability wasn't obvious or well documented and I confess I didn't spend much time looking.

I do mostly back-end web programming and system administration. IDEs certainly have their place, and might be more useful if I was developing desktop applications, iPhone apps, or coding for microcontrollers.

[1] ssh/tramp can cause lockups due to network issues but these settings in my .emacs file work nicely:

      ; tramp - edit over ssh
      ; open remote files with /username@host:remote_path
      (require 'tramp)
      (setq tramp-default-method "scp")
      (setq password-cache-expiry 3600) ; password cache - 60 * 60

Updated for clarity, and to add tramp config.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wouldn't. I use IntelliJ for almost all the stuff I code, thanks to the support for almost any languages which you can find via plugins.

</comment><comment><USER17> 100% control and it works in the terminal.

</comment><comment><USER9> I use Idea for Scala and Emacs for everything else. I prefer Emacs for the following reasons:

* I find Idea to be very cumbersome. I can perform many powerful transformations on text in Emacs with just a few keystrokes. Idea respects virtually none of them, even in Emacs mode. I often have to copy/paste from Idea into Emacs, make changes, then copy/paste back into Idea.

* Idea is hopelessly mouse driven. Most of the functionality can't be triggered via the keyboard.

* Emacs has a much smaller system footprint. Idea usually eats up a few gigs of RAM. I understand that it's trying to do a lot of stuff to help out, but I feel like it really needs to be optimized.

* I can mix and match minor modes. I don't usually care about spellchecking my code, but it's a few keystrokes away in any given buffer. In Idea I'm always getting warnings about misspellings, even though I don't care. I have a minor mode for line wrapping, showing whitespace, finding stop-points mid-word in camel-case/snake-case text, and innumerable other things. I can turn them on globally, or in a single buffer.

* Macros are wonderful in Emacs. They can do anything I can do with the keyboard, which is everything. I can even have a macro that uses Magit to find changed files in my project, find each occurrence of a given regex in those changed files, copy each of the containing lines into an Org mode document, and prettily format them. It takes about 20 seconds to build that macro.

* Emacs has thousands and thousands of great extensions. Idea has a fair number, but not nearly as many.

* Many of the languages I care about (Haskell, Idris, Agda, etc.) are either supported better in Emacs, or are ONLY supported in Emacs. LiquidHaskell is amazing, but I don't believe there's any support in Idea.

* I don't generally care about the sorts of IDE things that Idea does. Intelligent autocomplete doesn't appeal to me. Many languages (like Ruby, JaveScript, and Python) make it literally impossible to intelligently autocomplete with 100% accuracy. Much like with documentation, I'd prefer not have intelligent autocomplete at all rather than lying intelligent autocomplete.

* I can embed a terminal as a buffer. I know Idea has a terminal, but it treats it as a special window, and I can only have one without a terminal multiplexer. In Emacs it's just a major mode, so I can have as many as I want, and I can treat them like any other buffer. I can even use my familiar Emacs commands and minor modes on them.

That's a lot of bad stuff, but one thing that Idea gets right is that getting set up for JVM languages is easier. I keep meaning to get around to setting up proper Scala support in Emacs, but I never seem to find the couple of hours it would take. Idea has reasonable support for it out of the box.</comment>


Google Earth Outage: 17 hours and counting - <AUTHOR> https://support.google.com/earth/thread/27949708 <comment><USER2> "the globe may not reappear"

</comment><comment><USER3> I cleared my caches. The globe reappeared. What a relief.

</comment><comment><USER4> it's weekend, poor SREs :(

</comment><comment><USER5> Working fine for me.</comment>


Ask HN: What topic would be fine to create a new HN? - <AUTHOR>

Well I want to create a new HN, but I don't know to talk about.
Give me ideas, what do you like? Marketing? Sports? Off-topic?
Thanks in advance. <comment><USER2> Go to 4chan/reddit, check some boards and see which ones are not only active, but get a lot of current events and news articles posted.

See, I'd suggest math, but it'd be deader than coinspotter news.

Already have medicine news, financier news, designer news...

So try sports, photography, weapons, fashion...

<comment><USER3> I don't think fashion would work well in this context. Image-based sites like pinterest or we heart it work better for it.

Sports is OP's best bet.

<comment><AUTHOR> I like sports and photography, but as samweinberg said, I think image-based sites need others functionalities. I need to see more offers, to select the best one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> You can create one for gaming related news.

I created HN for cryptocurrency([http://www.cryptocurrencylive.com/newest](http://www.cryptocurrencylive.com/newest)). Ping me if you need any technical help:)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's good idea too, well I'm building a clone of HN but in PHP language, it will be open-source.</comment></comment>


How Doctors Die (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2011/11/30/how-doctors-die/ideas/nexus/ <comment><USER2> HN Commentary from 2011: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3313570>

<comment><USER3> The OP posted on that thread, so he knew this was a repost. Interesting article, but i fear for HN if reposting an old and interesting link you remember becomes a way of getting easy karma.

<comment><USER4> I suppose if the goal was karma farming then to be complete you would first repost a highly ranked story and then you would repost the highest ranked comment on your repost. And presumably if the same people read it again and voted again then you would capture the most possible re-karma points :-)

<comment><USER5> Luckily karma doesn't mean anything :D

<comment><USER6> Does it not? I thought higher karma results in your submissions and comments being ranked higher/viewed more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> As a 26 year old American, my experiences with the US hospital system have been so abysmal that I would consider not even seeking treatment for many serious conditions unless I knew the solution would be straightforward.

Abysmal in terms of having good medical outcomes, and being treated respectfully by hospital staff (who tend to be extremely overworked).

Plus, it's degrading to have no control over how much you will be charged, and whether insurance will cover it.

I personally have had one relatively minor medical issue, so the above comes more from experiences with family members in the hospital.

<comment><USER8> I wonder how much stress over money affects the health of patients. It's just the last thing you want to worry about when your body is failing.

I also think the system puts too much stress on relatives and the patient when it comes to choices and bureaucracy. Coming from Sweden, just having to choose between 7-8 different insurance plans is headache enough, but to have to choose your doctor, your hospital etc is just too much. I don't want to have to think about it. Americans seem to value choice and being able to shop around much more highly than I do. "Being a good consumer". I can intellectually understand why, but making choices all the time for everything is very taxing and energy consuming, and at some point I just want to be taken care of.

<comment><USER9> What happens in Sweden? Does the state assign a doctor to you? What happens if you don't like that doctor and want a different one?

I wouldn't want to do away with the freedom of choice, convenient as it may be to have a default. Besides, once you've chosen all those things you can just stick with them for years on end.

<comment><USER8> I'm sure you can choose if you really really want to, but there are sensible default options. The way it should be in my opinion: 1\. Go to nearest hospital, no need to worry about insurance or whether it's a "preferred" hospital for your insurance company. 2\. Get assigned doctor(s) based on your needs. 3\. Get treatment. No need to check what treatments are covered and if your doctor is trying to screw you over with unnecessary expensive tests. 3\. Relax. No paperwork because there is a unified information system. No insurance paperwork because it's all covered.

I think it's difficult to imagine how much easier it can be, when you're used to dealing with heavy bureaucracy and insurance companies. I can't explain how much less stressed I was in that system. Then again, I'm even stressed about owning a car with all that entails in terms of check-ups, oil changes, repairs, insurance, expiring licenses, parking etc. Perhaps other people are better at dealing with this crap than I am.

<comment><USER9> For regular doctor's appointments, I don't go to the hospital, I just go to my doctor's office.

I can imagine pretty well. When things are set up with _good_ insurance coverage, it's hardly any different than what you described, maybe with the exception of preferred networks, but in my city I've never had any doctor fall outside of the preferred network for my insurance anyway. Everything is either covered from the insurance or you get a straightforward bill, and even then you can get an HSA to cover your out-of-pocket expenses with some insurance plans. I've never had to deal with insurance paperwork either, aside from collecting my insurance card from the mail and presenting it at the doctor's office. It can easily be much, much worse though.

<comment><USER8> Well, obviously there are exceptions, but I wouldn't measure or defend a system based on the best case, but the average and standard deviation. Unfortunately, a huge amount of people are falling through the cracks. Sweden's system might be worse for rich/upper middle class people, but the average case is more than acceptable and the deviation is small. For instance, if you come in with a non life threatening condition, you will have to wait. That could mean waiting months for a specific surgery that you might get instantly in the US if you had good insurance. That kinda sucks when you have to wait and you're in pain, but is understandable unless you want to spend 50% of GDP on health care, or prioritize people based on how much they earn.

<comment><USER9> Historically, rich people from countries with socialized medicine would fly to the United States for medical treatment.

We could stand to improve the quality of care for the poor in the US, but there's lots of room to do that in the existing system. For people who have health insurance benefits from their work, I think having a little bit more paperwork is better than waiting for months for surgery.

<comment><USER8> Again, it's completely irrelevant what amazing treatment rich people get. And please, find me any evidence that American health care is in any way better or that anyone is flying there to get treatment. I can only find evidence of the contrary. If I ever get seriously sick, I'll be on the first plane out of here.

<comment><USER9> Look, your hobbyhorse is obviously this notion that there are absolutely no redeeming characteristics to the US health care system, so there's obviously no point getting into a nuanced conversation with you. It's rather off topic anyway. I regret ever thinking you were capable of a reasonable conversation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I dont know. Its one thing when you are 65 and all your kids are grown up. Its a whole other thing when you are 50 and have young children at home. I have a friend with 4 young kids. He has stage 4 cancer requiring constant chemo and pain, but he is going to fight it with everything they have in order to be there as long as possible with his kids - and maybe beat it.

<comment><USER11> Even that issue isn't that simple. There is no right answer to the debate between being there as long as you can for them and not wanting to have them experience their parents withering away and dying, entirely helpless. I have been fortunate not to be in this position but I can't imagine the latter being very healthy for the children. It's up to every parent and family to decide this in their own way.

I've known two people in the medical field in this position, late stage cancer with young children at home. Both chose to fight with drug cocktails and experimental treatments (such as sipuleucel-T when it was in trials) but stopped short of life debilitating treatments like chemo, although one was lucky enough to get laser based irradiation therapy (I forgot the technical term, but it uses an accelerator to irradiate a tumor without harming surrounding tissue as much as chemo: <http://www.protons.com/protons/index.page>). I never asked but I'm guessing that they've seen all too often what the family goes through with a loved one dying from terminal cancer and don't think it's worth the pain or suffering, for the family or for them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> If, as a US citizen, you're going to have (or need) serious treatment done for which you will have to pay a considerable amount of money it might be an option to go overseas. I can highly recommend going to Thailand. They have great medical centers in Bangkok with very professional and highly skilled doctors and specialists AND you're treated like a patient who needs care.

</comment><comment><USER13> This has been posted before, as indicated by ben1040's comment, but it's worth reading again.

</comment><comment><USER14> The following is my point of view. I understand some people have a different point of view, and I don't have a problem if they make it known, and their families and health care providers respect their wishes.

But from where I sit, the dying doctors' point of view, as presented in this article, struck me as irrational.

Axiom: Being dead is better than being alive. Under all circumstances.

I personally believe this axiom, very strongly. I'd rather spit in the eye of death with my last breath than go quietly into the night.

It logically follows, then, that a treatment that has a 1% chance of working is better than doing nothing, if the latter has a 0% chance of working, no matter how extreme the treatment is.

Living longer, even in a state of constant extreme pain, is better than dying. Well, maybe dying peacefully would be less painful for my relatives, but again, I personally place a much higher value on my own life than my family's feelings of sadness or whatever.

The only question which remains is the validity of the Axiom. If this world is all there is, if when you die there isn't an afterlife or reincarnation or whatever...then the Axiom is clearly true.

If you have strong religious belief, then perhaps your afterlife is better. But only a _perfect_ belief that you _are_ headed to a _better_ place makes it rational to give up. If you have a little bit of doubt -- if you're 99% sure you're going to Heaven but 1% of you whispers that maybe there's nothing and you'll turn into dust instead -- you still want to put off rolling that die as long as you can. Ditto if you're 100% sure there's an afterlife and 99% sure you've been good enough to get into Heaven, but 1% of you says that maybe Hell is where you're headed.

If your religion forbids suicide, and there's a chance that the Judge who will weigh your life will interpret not opting for the best available medical treatment as equivalent to suicide, then that affects your decision too. Although, to be fair, this cuts both ways: The suffering you cause your family by lingering beyond your time on Earth might count against you too. Literally "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." It's unclear enough that there should really be a few more commandments or something, to address all the corner cases.

<comment><USER15> My wife is a doctor. For her, seeing people die horrible deaths is not an abstract possibility. It is something that she's seen far more of than she wants, and is likely to see in the future again more than she wants.

Despite having no particular religious views, she would disagree with your "axiom" in the strongest of possible terms. So would I. I am not religious, but my preferences include not suffering horrible pain. I also am against causing severe emotional and/or financial distress for people I care about. Those preferences lead to there being situations where I am literally better off dead than alive, and I have made sure that my wife is aware of what those situations are so that she can make that decision for me if I am incapacitated and it needs to be made.

<comment><USER16> My wife is a doc as well. Her opinions and experiences map to you wife's, mine to yours.

This is not about life being better than death. This is about the amount of pain and suffering you cause yourself and others while fighting off death.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I've saw this article back in 2011.

Sometime after that I had conversations with my Grandmother and Mother about their wishes.

I now know their expectations, and they know mine. It's important to think about death, and these situations. It's even more important to express your feelings to those who have the power to impact how you will be treated.

<comment><USER18> This is very good, but you need more than verbal undertakings. You need paper, in particular you need a Medical Power of Attorney, a notarized document authorizing you to make medical decisions on behalf of your Mother and Grandmother (and your Mother, for the Grandmother) (oh, and mutually reciprocal ones for you and your spouse if any).

Without that paper, hospital personnel may ignore you when you say what she wanted, in fact may feel they are legally required to ignore you.

And the paper needs to be accessible on short notice (not in a bank safety- deposit box). It's a good idea to have a copy filed at her primary care doctor's office.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't see any statistics, just a very well-written article with some anecdotes.

<comment><USER20> Not everything needs statistics to ring a bell.

I've seen two grandfathers of mine on which absurd medical care was given: one was seriously ill and maintained as a living mummy for months (he did look as bad as people who were rescued from extermination camp at the end of WWII) and another who, while in coma, had a leg cut off although everyone knew he wouldn't wake up. Who the heck wants to wake up with only one leg when one know you'll die in the next few hours / days of terrible cancers that spread throughout the whole body?

It's _precisely_ what this article is talking about because it's really what's going on.

People dying in an environment they're not familiar with, experienced things they never experienced during their whole life: broken ribs due to overzealous CPR, one leg cut off, tubes everywhere.

I've had a girlfriend who was a doctor and the sheer number of crazy situation like this she was describing were insane.

Believe me: this is very real and you probably don't want the statistics.

Because the probability that _you_ will notice, the day your day has come, that you're missing one leg while feeling your ribs being broken is very far from zero.

<comment><USER19> No, I _DO_ in fact, want the statistics, if a writer is going to make the claim that:

"And they don't die like the rest of us. What's unusual about them is not how much treatment they get compared to most Americans, but how little."

It should be easy to prove/disprove this, as doctors get surveyed all the time on different subjects.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It seems almost purposely designed to bankrupt you as quickly as possible so that the agencies can start passing you around as some sort of billing token.

<comment><USER22> Why would agencies prefer you after bankruptcy?

<comment><USER23> you can't do it again for 7 years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> "someone breaking their ribs in an attempt to resuscitate them with CPR (that's what happens if CPR is done right)"

Is that always necessarily true...?

<comment><USER25> Not always, but very often.

Guidelines in the US and Europe recommend compressions which are four or five cm deep, and that's a pretty significant percentage of the distance from your sternum to your back. Remember of course that one of the things that your rib cage is supposed to protect against is blows to your heart and lungs, so it shouldn't be too much of a surprise that a procedure that is supposed to compress your heart is also going to cause damage to your ribcage.

<comment><USER26> Yes this happened to my father. I remember the crunching sound of his ribs to this day. This was at waterloo station in London in 1993. He just keeled over. Fortunately for him, someone had just got stabbed 100 yards away so people were already on hand. The paramedic didn't even blink. Everyone else shit a brick.

He survived though and after a bypass op is fine to this day.

<comment><USER25> It probably helped as well that St Thomas's is literally within a few hundred yards of Waterloo Station.

The speed with which you can be in specialist care is absolutely critical when it comes to cardiac problems - which is a large part of the reason why survival rates are far higher in places like Central London where you've got both fast response time for paramedics (for London as a whole, ~75% of 'immediately life-threatening' calls have a response time of under eight minutes) and multiple world class Hospitals with specialist cardiac centres.

Even so, that's one hell of a lucky break your father had and fantastic that he both survived and is fine still!

<comment><USER26> Very true regarding St Thomas' - that's where they took him.

Very lucky, but not for the poor guy who got stabbed. Not sure what happened to him at the end of the day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> we won't be able to repair these various cancers until we can do whole cell emulation on the offending cell and contrast/compare it to a healthy equivalent.

We need to understand the mechanics of cells down to the molecular level. Then maybe we can think of a fix. At this stage in society, we know just enough about cancers to do more harm than good in the remaining years of life for the worst forms of cancer.

<comment><USER28> There are plausible ways to fix cancer, outlined in some detail, but they are so different from the present status quo of cancer research that the community does not pursue them. If it doesn't look a lot like a drug, good luck in obtaining funding for your research.

For example, WILT / OncoSENS. Which is to say turn off all mechanisms for telomere lengthening and work around the issues that will cause by replacing stem cell populations:

[http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2011/10/accumulating- the-...](http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2011/10/accumulating-the- groundwork-for-the-ultimate-cure-for-cancer.php)

<http://sens.org/research/introduction-to-sens-research/onco>

\---

Further, even a robust cure for a specific cancer based on targeted cell killing (by surface chemistry or other markers) doesn't require a complete understanding of the cancer cell - you just need to identify a reliable marker, no need to understand why it's a reliable marker.</comment></comment>


Code of Ethics Doesn't Influence Decisions of Software Developers - <AUTHOR> https://www.csc.ncsu.edu/news/2155 <comment><USER2> Well, that's a bummer. Still, I can think of considerations with a "code of ethics" aside from direct prevention. Certainly easier to deal with a violation after the fact, if you don't have to argue about what the expectations even were.

If a policeman tickets you for speeding, there's not usually any argument over whether speeding is legal or not. "No speeding" is codified by law.</comment>


Ask HN: What do I do with 2 decades of sysadmin knowledge? - <AUTHOR> I've worked as a sysadmin for 2 decades now. I know pretty well Linux internals, I can program in C/Python decently, discuss filesystems, talk about IT operations, networking, etc. I think I'm a pretty well rounded professional.
Yet, all work I can find today is around creating CI/CD pipelines in some cloud product.
It seems all this knowledge is for nothing now. I see my less experienced colleagues with barely any knowledge of the lower layers of their infrastructure, stumble upon issue after issue and then write postmortems like they discovered water on Mars.
I'm being more negative right now then I usually am but I really don't want into management and I really like working with infrastructure and designing well oiled systems. I also don't want to be stuck in traditional sysadmin work (which I am not, for about a decade already).
Is positioning myself as a experienced consultant to safe failing infrastructure projects from doom my only alternative in this world of shallow systems knowledge? <comment><USER2> Start writing tools for sysadmins. Think of all the times when you hit a wall because there was no inventory database that could be _queried from command line_ , not just browsed through a web UI, or when you wanted to coordinate several backup systems but keep them separate, or when you wanted to run a well-defined script on a remote host after an event, or when you wanted to plug in your own data processing into a monitoring system, or run a command on a set of servers with some of them being temporarily down -- and later review the run reports, or maybe to keep syslog logs in some place that could be queried and not be as brittle and slow as Elasticsearch.

There are still blank spots in sysadmin's tooling, but nobody looks this way. And there are still companies that know that they need tool writers.

</comment><comment><USER3> Update your linkedin and clearly define your goal to work in a traditional data-center. There are still plenty of mid to large companies that have a need for traditional engineering and system administration. It is actually getting much harder to find people with this experience.

Pipeline engineering is just one tiny piece of system architecture, engineering and administration. The flood of requests you are seeing are the small to mid sized companies experimenting in public cloud to reduce costs. One size does not fit all.

Certainly position yourself as someone that can (re)build their infrastructure to create a solid foundation on which all manor of automation can be created and simplified.

</comment><comment><USER4> There are plenty of consulting firms that do work for federal government or fortune 1000 that need people with your skills.

Add value to your skills by learning how the cloud environments layer on top of this and maybe by getting a cert or two. A colleague of mine blitzed the AWS Solutions Architect Associate in a day based on similar experience to yours.

There's lots of work in advising best approach to move to cloud or stay on prem or do combo.

</comment><comment><USER5> Would joining FANG et al be something you'd be interested in? I thought they hired you guys to handle the actual servers that power the cloud.

<comment><USER6> Visa issues don't allow me to consider that at the moment but I think joining as a SRE in one of these companies would be a great choice.

Unfortunately, it's impossible for a 3rd-world citizen to get a US visa and one European country already refused my visa request a few months ago (on the basis I don't have a degree). I don't think I can go through that path again with the odds of getting through being so low for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> learn Kubernetes and re-label yourself as a Senior DevOps engineer

<comment><USER6> Already there :)

Maybe I'm getting pessimistic due to my workplace and what I see in websites like WeWorkRemotely, RemoteOk, etc. I'm not sure, maybe I need to stick my head a bit more and get a glimpse at other companies.

I see people spinning up K8s clusters with no thought to security, performance, etc. All. The. Time. And they are getting so much accomplished with a flood of kudos. And I'm the party pooper if I, very politely really, raise these concerns and offer solutions. It's like I'm the uninvited guest to the party, I don't know how to put it another way.

This is what drove me to think of being a consultant. That way people can shoot themselves in the foot and I'm called in to clean everything. At least it's not this daily struggle (or is it?)

<comment><USER8> > I see people spinning up K8s clusters with no thought to security, > performance, etc. All. The. Time.

Totally agreed. A Kubernetes (or any similar large thing) cluster is a huge liability - it's a living thing of its own, kinda like a nuclear reactor that needs competent people to manage & monitor it all the time.

Not to mention a lot of K8S users would actually be better off with something smaller like AWS or even Heroku, and make huge savings on maintenance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> java-man you can write a software tool which packages your knowledge into a useful product.

<comment><USER6> I have thought about this and I may actually pursue that, yes. It's good advice.

My main task is troubleshooting, to be honest. I keep getting called into "war rooms" to pinpoint where multiple teams are failing to find a solution. I can't think of a product that's like that (that doesn't involve AI?)

But maybe working on a building block solution (monitoring, backup, etc) as a service might give me a good path. Thanks.</comment></comment>


Thoughts On The Correlation Between Academic and Workplace Performance - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.zoho.com/how-we-recruit-on-formal-credentials-vs-experience-based-education/

<comment><USER2> I agree (I've hired for 200 slots).

Grade Point and school are not good indicators.

If you need people to follow directions = degree can be helpful

If you need someone to lead, look for out of the box thinkers and most will not have degrees.</comment>


Bradley Manning: MEPs' open letter to the US government - <AUTHOR> http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/index.php/topic,6479.msg25280.html#msg25280

<comment><AUTHOR> It's amazing what the US has turned into. US citizens are subjected to torture by the government and its agencies, citizens are put through hell and treated like criminals by the TSA just to fly, the rich and the powerful are bailed out of their own mistakes while citizens are left with nothing.

To someone looking in from the outside (like me), it looks like the US is slowly devolving into a third world state going by the shabby treatment of its own citizens.

Edit: I forgot to mention the atrocious debt!

<comment><USER2> I'm not amazed at what the US has turned into, but I am surprised by the complacency demonstrated by the majority of Americans. As long as nobody tries to take away TV and our creature comforts, to hell with the people the government is openly torturing, surely they deserve it, right?

As someone looking in from Canada, it looks to me like America is going the way of the Soviet Union, and muchly due to the same problem, exessive corruption and greed sprinkled with some good old homegrown American apathy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just link to the letter as published by The Guardian:

[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/29/bradley- manning-...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/29/bradley-manning-mep- open-letter)

<comment><USER2> Better than the headline link which takes you to a page with an annoying floating box telling you how easy it is to join their forum and that you should join their forum because it's so easy to join.</comment></comment>


Algorithms Need Managers, Too - <AUTHOR> https://hbr.org/2016/01/algorithms-need-managers-to <comment><USER2> URL is truncated, yielding -404. Correct one is:

[https://hbr.org/2016/01/algorithms-need-managers- too](https://hbr.org/2016/01/algorithms-need-managers-too)</comment>


Ask HN: How is your JavaScript based backend organized? - <AUTHOR> I come from a Ruby on Rails background. It is great - working with Rails has had two huge upsides for me. First, the framework means there is a good way to do almost everything. Two, it makes me think about problems and the solutions generally fit elegantly into the framework.
Now, I'm sure there are Rails like frameworks for full-stack Javascript development.
I'd love to hear about how you organize things like: - Data migrations. - Deployments. - ORM - Background tasks. - APIs - Multiple language support in front-end templates.
etc..etc..
Do most people roll their own back-kend framework?
As an aside, whats the state of server-side template rendering? Is that industry practice? <comment><USER2> \- Data migrations: Knex.js

\- Deployment: Every repo contains a "deployment" directory with a dir each for "staging" and "production" with all of the Kubernetes manifests (deployment, service, configmap etc.) necessary. Everything except secrets, which are managed manually. These declarative configs get applied to our cluster by gitlab-ci.

\- ORM: You're probably not going to like this as a rails guy, but I've moved away from full, ActiveRecord-style ORMs. They don't work particularly well for my use cases and I enjoy the flexibility and control a thinner library like knex gives me.

\- Background tasks: These are implemented as standalone apps running in our cluster, either as deployed workers subscribed to a Google Cloud Pub/Sub queue or scheduled jobs deployed using the Kubernetes cronjob functionality.

APIs: Express for basically everything HTTP. A lot more of our stuff is moving to PubSub for inter-service communication.

\- Front-end templates: Everything is server-side rendered React. We run separate front and back end servers, scaled independently. The Kubernetes ingress handles routing to the SSR/React app and API app as necessary.

</comment><comment><USER3> expressjs (and some plugins for input parsing, compression, etc..) for HTTP server and API.

socket.io for websockets (easy API and great fallback functionality).

(I think both will serve you well with the default settings. you won't need to worry about scaling until you have hundreds or thusands of req/sec)

for deployment IMO it's always better to use docker, and it's easy to learn the basics in one afternoon. (for small apps: on gitlab/github push -> do gitlab-ci/travis-ci docker build + api testing + run deploy script)

ORM - you can probably find one for every DB out there, but I prefer to write the queries myself.

Data migration - I'll probably work directly with the DB... depends on the scale of the app

</comment><comment><USER4> Little bit vague but here goes:

technology: Loopback (based off of ExpressJS, which is based off of NodeJS, which is based off of Javascript, wew....)

by organised, if you mean dir structure then the top levels are /helper- scripts (bash), /models (resource type property JSONs and JS scripts for RPCs), /server (entrypoint points, middleware, etc.), and a few misc files.

if by organised you mean source control, then it's bundled with the same repo as my uis, lb, etc. one repo => one app is a golden rule.

what other meanings of "organised" could you mean? Design methods maybe?

</comment><comment><USER5> [https://lad.js.org](https://lad.js.org)

<comment><USER6> Looks pretty cool. Wish it had support for a relational database though.</comment></comment>


Toyota User Experiences - <AUTHOR> http://www.square-9.com/user-experience-from-the-consumers-eye#more-4687

<comment><USER2> There are several things wrong with choosing a 4Runner as your daily driver over something more economical.

1\. Its ability to handle snow is not so much a function of the ride height as it is a function of the type and quality of the tires. 2\. 4-wheel drive is next to useless in the snow without a locking rear differential, something that is only available in the Trail Package. It also does not help you stop or maneuver in slippery conditions. 3\. Economy AWD cars such as the Subaru Forester are easier to handle, have similar interior space, use less fuel during the 75% of the year without snow-clogged roads, can handle snow with appropriate tires, are safer in crash tests, and are less expensive.

Now if you mentioned you take the 4Runner on the trail, or in general use it in conditions more treacherous than transporting children on snowy roads, I would have more sympathy with your choice. As it stands, I have next to none.</comment>


Google has quietly launched a developer website for Fuchsia OS - <AUTHOR> https://www.androidcentral.com/google-has-silently-launched-developer-website-its-experimental-fuchsia-os <comment><USER2> Discussed already: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20311071](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20311071)</comment>


Chinese companies 'rent' white foreigners - <AUTHOR> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/06/29/china.rent.white.people/index.html?hpt=C1&fbid=U4IyWp283bK

<comment><USER2> Didn't this hit the HN front page last week or earlier?</comment>


How Academic 'Blacklists' Impede Serious Work on Climate Science - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2020/02/09/a-climate-blacklist-that-works-it-should-make-her-unhirable-in-academia/ <comment><USER2> If orgs like Skeptical Science already exist and are influencing academia then why should the public assume that the advice of climate scientists is anything but political at this point? Laymen don't have the insight to make judgements about which scientists are quacks and which are just under fire from a cancel campaign. You can't expect to be treated with credibility while being this susceptible to outside influence and it's weird that there isn't a universal effort to identify and decry this sort of behavior within the field.

<comment><USER3> What? Skeptical science calls out scientists who are regurgitating false information, and proven incorrect theories. People should expect not to be hired as scientists when they're doing that.

Why should I trust an someone to not lie to support any other incorrect or unproven belief?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When she finally seems like she's about to reach some clarity in her accusations she reaches for a cheap shot regarding some joke that made a nazi reference on a private server.

I'm having a hard time having sympathy for either side here. The only thing that seems clear here is that the real winners here are a yo who stays out of academia</comment>


Upgrading to Rails 5 Beta – The Hard Way - <AUTHOR> https://blog.heroku.com/archives/2016/1/22/rails-5-beta-upgrade <comment><AUTHOR> Successfully running Rails 5 beta in production and I'm on Rails contributor team. Ask me anything!

<comment><AUTHOR> Q: How does anything ever get upvoted on HN if no one browses /newest?

<comment><AUTHOR> Let's keep the questions focused on Rails please.</comment></comment></comment>


Apple deprecates Java - <AUTHOR> http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#releasenotes/Java/JavaSnowLeopardUpdate3LeopardUpdate8RN/NewandNoteworthy/NewandNoteworthy.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010380-CH4-SW1 <comment><USER2> Note that they've only deprecated _their own Java runtime_.

<comment><USER3> I have not done Java development on OS X, but doesn't this mean that OS X 10.7 would not ship with a Java runtime? Wouldn't this have a negative effect on the ease of packaging and distributing Java programs on the platform?

<comment><USER4> Was Java that big on the Mac? Neither Windows nor most Linux distros ship with a Java runtime.

<comment><USER5> Yes, at one point Apple made a big deal about Java being a "primary" language on the OS X platform. It had proper Coca bindings, Mac like look & feel, etc. Steve hawked it in one of the early OS X keynotes as being the future of the Mac platform. An easy language for all those that were confused by Objective-C.

Several years ago Apple reversed their position on Java and have been ignoring it ever since. This is merely the last act in the Java play at Apple. Goodnight sweet prince!

<comment><USER6> > Steve hawked it in one of the early OS X keynotes as being the future of the > Mac platform

That's standard practice. You make it easy to port apps to your platform until you gain traction and until your exclusive technologies do, then make it hard to port away from your platform by phasing out technologies that would enable that.

A Java app that runs fine on OSX but that's easy to port to (or directly run on) Windows or Linux does Apple no good while an application written in Objective-C depending on the latest *Kit stuff locks both developer and user into Apple's walled garden.

Their move from GCC to clang is no coincidence.

<comment><USER7> > Their move from GCC to clang is no coincidence.

Erm... what? Clang has already been ported to Windows (and other platforms). Their move from GCC to clang comes from GCC sucking goat's balls at error reporting and being integrated into an IDE. You might want to note Apple _produces_ an IDE so that's kind-of a big deal for them, and a big reason for the existence of LLVM and related technologies (Clang, LLDB, ...) is very much that they can be used as libraries and easily integrated into tools.

Seriously, you should be careful, your anti-apple-tag shows a bit too heavily in that comment.

<comment><USER6> Clang/LLVM is BSD while GCC is GPL. That means Apple can extend them all they want without ever giving you, or their competition, any sources.

If they ever perceive a threat from their competition, Clang/LLVM provides a lot more maneuvering space than GCC ever would.

And yes, GCC is a very hard thing to integrate into tools and it's that way by design.

<comment><USER8> I would like to point out that Apple employs the guy that builds LLVM/clang and all those projects and yet they are still releasing the source code and everything out there for the public to use.

<comment><USER6> > Apple employs the guy that builds LLVM/clang

Curious. Is the copyright Apple's?

<comment><USER9> The copyright belongs to each contributor: <http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's a smart move from Apple's point of view. Why should Apple work to support Flash or Java or any platform that is owned by someone else? Why not shift the burden of maintenance, and dealing with bugs, onto those who own the platform? And why not open the door to future Apple products that might compete in the same space?

Besides all that, this moves suggests a confidence that was unimaginable 10 or more years ago. Apple is no longer desperate for market share, the way it was in 1997.

All the same, it makes me sad. I like the JVM. I do not like Java itself, but I like Groovy and I have started to like Clojure.

<comment><USER11> They should care because they sell hardware to people who use those platforms. They will sell less hardware to Java/Scala/Groovy/Clojure/Jython/JRuby/Beanshell programmers this way.

The Mac platform is not important enough for Oracle to care. And Java Apps won't be in the App Store.

<comment><USER12> Why isn't the Mac platform important enough for Oracle to care?

Seems to me that maybe it's big enough that Mac should be supported by Oracle. That would be a bit more ideal, get updates when all the platforms get updates.

<comment><USER11> Even if Oracle supported Macs. Apple made it clear they won't allow Java Apps in the Mac App Store.

<comment><USER13> So what? The Mac App Store doesn't erase the fact that I can go to <http://www.eclipse.org> and get eclipse.

<comment><USER11> But I suppose you won't be able to run it on iOSXI

<comment><USER13> Haters gonna Hate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This worries me greatly because my startup's product is based on Java, which gave us an advantage over others in our space for being able to work across Mac and Windows while maintaining a great user experience thanks to a lot of customization on our part (see profile).

While I concede that Java has lost relevance on Mac, there are outliers like ourselves who've written native looking Java software and don't have a viable route should the worst case scenario arise.

My only inside knowledge is that the Java "team" within Apple was very small, which explains why it constantly lagged behind on updates.

</comment><comment><USER15> To argue that having an Apple supported JVM was good, or that it doesn't matter because you'll just have a 3rd-party JVM instead, misses the fact that it's _the change itself_ that will be cause the of problems. As crap as Apple's Java support has been, it was a known quantity: as a developer, you know what your Mac users have (currently it's "most have Java 6, but there are plenty of people still stuck with Java 5"). The same is true for Windows; even though the JVM comes from Sun, everyone gets that same JVM, and pretty much everyone has Java 6.

It will take some time before a new _one true JVM_ for Mac emerges. Furthermore, Apple's wishiwashiness on the support (" _may_ not be included") will probably inhibit development on a true replacement.

</comment><comment><USER16> Given that they are deprecating _their own Java runtime_ and that the major differentiation of said runtime from others is the _much better approximation of the Mac UI_ in Java apps, and given that this deprecation is coming ~9 months ahead of OS X 10.7 Lion, I'm going to guess they are finally freshening up the OS X look & feel and don't want to spend time keeping their JVM in lockstep.

<comment><USER17> That seems a reasonable guess. Also, java has been showing up with a lot of vulnerabilities, so the beancounters may have wondered about the costs of doing qa on implementing those. We know that it is months before we get major new versions of java or some of the security fixes. Also java 7 is on the horizon and the dance would start over again.

There's an opportunity here that Apple should encourage. I write in-house apps in java on the Mac for deployment for my Windows colleagues. They are not going to stop using Windows. Java has real good libraries for rdbms access.

I guess the options are java develop in a vm hosting Linux or hello -ugh- mono. But I hope someone gives us a good java that runs natively.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> That is very bad news for those of us who use Java on Mac OS X. And I don't mean UI programming, but developing server Java (or any JVM-hosted language, such as Clojure) applications.

<comment><USER19> Why? [http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#releasenotes/Java/Ja...](http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#releasenotes/Java/JavaSnowLeopardUpdate3LeopardUpdate8RN/ResolvedIssues/ResolvedIssues.html%23//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010380-CH3-DontLinkElementID_11)

The situation for Java will now be the same as that for developing in any programming language that Apple doesn't ship with OS X or that ships with a version lower than the one you are targeting.

My suspicion is that Apple is likely to drop Java in 10.8 which gives ~3 years for the JVM community on OS X to get their act together making OpenJDK work well with OS X.

That said, being a Clojure user this does increase my interest in seeing a Clojure-in-Clojure sooner than later. I'd like to see Clojure target LLVM the way MacRuby does.

<comment><USER20> I think stuff like this isn't really that bad for devs who use the platform. Devs (should) have the ability to pull down the replacement in this situation when the time comes. It's going to be harder on the end user that no longer gets why his/her Java application no longer works right.

<comment><USER21> What end-user Java applications are there for OS X? The only one which comes to mind is Crashplan but I'm sure it's lurking around in other places.

<comment><USER22> Do IDEs count? A lot of Mac users use Eclipse. It's not common among _all-Mac_ teams that just do XCode, but it's fairly common for devs in groups that mostly do PC development to own Macbooks that they run Eclipse on.

Probably not a big concern for Apple, but it's common in universities, too, since Eclipse is (until now, at least) cross-platform enough that you can assume Windows/Mac/Linux-using students can all install it on their laptops.

<comment><USER23> As an Android developer using Eclipse on a mac, this news majorly sucks. I hope the offering from Oracle will be better than Apple's JVM though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I was under the impression that iTunes (the backend server) was all written in Java using Apple's own WebObjects framework that they ported from Obj-C.

Have they ported it back, or are they planning to ship OpenJDK for server purposes?

<comment><USER25> Or are they planning to keep iTMS on Java 6 forever?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> People who follow Apple's developer communication have seen this coming for years. It'll be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to fill the gap or not.

<comment><USER27> There is already a port of OpenJDK: <http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/>

Though it's not developed by Oracle employees afaik.

<comment><USER28> SoyLatte is nothing more than a build of the OpenJDK BSD Port. You can build that yourself.

<comment><USER29> Not entirely the case. Soylatte is what became the OpenJDK BSD Mac Port. It was granted re-licensing and was merged upstream to OpenJDK.

What this means:

\- The Java 6 Java Research License (JRL) binaries are based on Sun's Java 6 JRL releases, which mean they closely mirror the shipping official Java 6. They are also out-of-date and no longer supported. You can only build them using the JRL sources available from Soylatte, and redistribution of code and binaries is limited by the JRL.

\- The OpenJDK 6/7 binaries are built from the OpenJDK repository, which is where all the Soylatte and BSD patchset changes were merged. All current development occurs as part of the OpenJDK BSD-Port project, and the code and binaries are fully redistributable.

<comment><USER28> Well, I should have said "at this point". Surely building bsd-port is more interesting than building your own Java 6.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> This could be good news for anyone who uses a Mac to work with Java. There could finally be a JDK for OS X that doesn't lag years behind official Java releases.

On the other hand, the margin between Apple not supporting something and Apple banning something is incredibly narrow. Steve Jobs doesn't seem to understand the difference between choice and fragmentation very well.

<comment><USER31> Banning? I think that seems rather unlikely. To my knowledge Apple's never done anything of the sort on the desktop. On mobile platforms users are more accustomed to having restrictions in place, but if they banned Java on Mac OS the backlash would be immense.

<comment><USER30> An outright ban does indeed seem remote, but if they start to tie software installation/update/maintainance on the Mac to the Mac AppStore and ban Java apps from the AppStore, the effect on end users' ability to use Java applications is tantamount to a ban.

<comment><USER31> I hadn't thought of this in light of the App Store announcement, but apparently it's essential to do so.

From the review guidelines:

\- Apps that use deprecated or optionally installed technologies (e.g., Java, Rosetta) will be rejected

That's interesting.

<comment><USER32> I wonder if Apple is planning a "superior platform" strategy? If they can move to an App Store being the norm for Mac users and solve lots of deeply ingrained security and compatibility problems in the process, Microsoft/Windows is going to have quite a hard time following. The record for Apple accomplishing big architectural shifts with minimal pain (OS X, PowerPC -> x86) is much better than for Microsoft. (Vista) It would be like a lightly- armed force luring heavily equipped force into boggy ground, where the latter gets stuck in the mud while the former only gets slowed down.

<comment><USER33> Of course, Debian has done this since the early nineties, and yeah, it is nice to have guidelines (DFSG, etc.) that applications must follow to be a part of the platform. Having one entity responsible for system integration makes for a well-integrated system.

I doubt what Apple comes up with will be as good as Debian, but at least it gives "the masses" the chance to use a well-integrated platform.

<comment><USER32> I'm thinking about going beyond what even Debian accomplished. As awesome as Debian is, it's based on unix-derived architecture from the 1970's. What about a successor to OS X with capabilities, orthogonal persistence, and no bootup? (App Store requirements and APIs could target easy migration to the new architecture.) Microsoft would have to follow or be left in the dust, but it would be travelling a path Apple is better suited for.

<comment><USER33> _it's based on unix-derived architecture from the 1970s_

Isn't this like saying that we shouldn't use wheeled vehicles anymore, because wheels are a stone-age technology?

It's fun to reinvent the wheel, but the wheel has been around for a long time for a reason.

<comment><USER34> I think of Unix as more of a local-maxima than a fundamental item like the wheel. It's more like the internal combustion engine: there's been lots of technologies proposed that fix problems with it, but it's managed to improve faster than those technologies can gain traction.

<comment><USER32> _I think of Unix as more of a local-maxima than a fundamental item_

Recognizing the difference between fundamentals and local-maxima constitutes some of the most powerful entrepreneurship!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Combine this news with the announcement of the App Store for OS X, and one possible conclusion is that Apple doesn't want Java-based apps in the app store. It's an easier prohibition to make if the JVM is not officially supported by Apple.

Also, this could be a guard move against Oracle, a capricious litigator.

<comment><USER24> _2.24 "Apps that use deprecated or optionally installed technologies (e.g., Java, Rosetta) will be rejected"_

It doesn't explicitly e.g. it, but Flash isn't installed by default either on the new MacBook Airs, so I'm guessing you can't do a wrapper around a SWF either.

<comment><USER36> Flash has had "publish to exe" capabilities since forever so I'm sure something'll emerge that publishes to w/e Macs use.

<comment><USER37> The Mac App Store also requires that you use XCode to package your apps.

<comment><USER38> One thing this enables is switching platforms. If a future MacBook Air runs on ARM instead of Intel, anyone using Xcode would only need to recompile to target the new platform. Similar to how Intel support was easy for Xcode developers (but very hard for Metrowerks developers). Getting everyone on Xcode gives Apple tremendous flexibility. They could even have apps target LLVM-IL (whatever it's called) instead of the CPU directly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> So then what's the best way to do cross-platform development?

For all its faults, Java does deliver something that resembles the "write once, run anywhere" dream.

Any idea for a high-performance, cross-platform, native UI development stack? Is C++/Objective-C still the best option?

<comment><USER40> Depending on what you want to do, Adobe AIR would be a practical way of delivering applications on Mac, Win and Linux...

<comment><USER41> It's worth mentioning that AIR apps do not use native UI widgets. (and in my opinion: the Flex widgets kind of suck)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> I am numb with anger right now. I sell java based consumer app and good 50% of my sales are from macos. To be honest java prohibition in the appstore wasn't surprising, I had to sign new dev agreement in august that explicitly prohibited java based apps, but they let my app in anyway.

What I find so utterly surprising is that they are completely killing it on the os level.

html5 here I come.

</comment><comment><USER43> I wonder if putting the boot into the most straightforward cross-platform solution for desktop apps has anything to do with the proliferation of OSX Java apps with shoddy/un-maclike UX/UI or whether it's something to do with Oracle's recent moves.

<comment><USER44> I think it just means that Apple has no interest in bringing Java 7 to OS X. It certainly took them a long time to release Java 6.

Funny thing is, one of my favorite Mac apps was/is written in Java: Cyberduck FTP client.

Cyberduck is an open source app originally written using the Java/Cocoa bridge, then using some hybrid of Cocoa and Java. But the thing is, the end user has absolutely _no idea_ that it's a Java application. The only reason I know it's written in Java is because I looked at their source code to see how they implemented Quick Look (before it was a public API), and boom, the damn thing's in Java! As a longtime hater of Java desktop apps, I was flabbergasted.

As far as I'm concerned, OS X was the only desktop platform where Java had any sort of chance for user acceptance, but it never caught on with developers. As such, Java has been effectively dead as an option for desktop development since OS X Leopard.

<comment><USER45> Really, that's very surprising. I'm a longtime Cyberduck user and had no idea...

<comment><USER46> I am both surprised and delighted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> The biggest loss here is the Mac specific GUI bits. Not only does Apple Java use native drawing primitives for ui (instead of requiring X11 like some ports), it also doesn't look completely horrible.

Unlikely as it is, I wish Apple would upstream that code to Oracle.

I guess there's potentially still SWT on top of a ported, open source Java7 from Unix/Linux if you need to do non-X11 UI on Mac.

Well, some Googling suggests that might work anyway...

</comment><comment><USER48> Maybe the fact WebObjects was removed from Snow Leopard Server means they don't depend on it internally as much?

It seems like they've been cooling off on Java development and support over the last few years.

<comment><USER49> I believe that the current WebObjects license (while no longer having a licensing fee) stipulates that it should be run on Apple hardware. Some wags have speculated that it would be OK to run it on an Mac Pro even with Windows 7.

I don't believe this is an immediate issue, but one that people doing long term planning should consider. If you want to write/run Java code, have at it. If you want to write something that will be widely distributed, you may want to think carefully.

<comment><USER50> It used to be cross platform. Back in the dotcom days, I was at a company that would sell implementations of it for Windows and Sun servers.

That was when the software price started at 50k (iirc) though. When you're charging that kind of coin, I guess the motivation to support Windows is higher.

<comment><USER51> Java has _never_ been cross platform. Back in the dot.bomb days running java on anything other than Windows and Solaris was a huge pain in the ass when not outright impossible, and there was Sun's infamous internal memo about how much Java on Solaris sucked!

<comment><USER52> I found the memo from 2003: [http://web.archive.org/web/20030210024427/http://www.interna...](http://web.archive.org/web/20030210024427/http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321) \-- this blog thread discussing it is enlightening: <http://www.advogato.org/article/624.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> The reason that this is a big deal is that they've released/leaked some of the guidelines for the Mac App Store and it states that apps developed using "deprecated or optionally-installed technologies will not be accepted."

</comment><comment><USER54> Does this effectively mean that I will not be able to use java application on newer OS X at all (in case of java runtime support removal), or I will have to install some third party java package?

<comment><USER55> It seems like you will do what you do on Windows and some Linux distributions, you will go to Oracle's site and download the JDK / JRE from them. I am really wondering if this is totally and Apple thing or partially a suggestion from Oracle.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> CALM DOWN EVERYONE

Here's what Steve Jobs said in an email to a Java developer: "Sun (now Oracle) supplies Java for all other platforms. They have their own release schedules, which are almost always different than ours, so the Java we ship is always a version behind. This may not be the best way to do it."

To me, the sheer number of people using Java on the Mac in one way or another guarantee that it's not going anywhere. Apple isn't going to develop it anymore, but that may be a good thing. We'll see.

If Java apps can't be in the app store it would be a bummer. I don't see where it says that though - the app store rules say that you can't depend on deprecated tech. But it doesn't prevent you from shipping your Java based app complete with a Java VM - like you'd do on Windows.

</comment><comment><USER57> Jobs did say at D8 that Apple chooses technologies that are in their Springs and not their Falls. Java has had far to many Falls....

Seriously, Apple does not need Java and I think the market for Java apps has become few and far....

</comment><comment><USER58> Now deprecate your own OpenGL drivers.

<comment><USER59> Then who would maintain them? The hardware manufacturers? :\

<comment><USER58> Windows and Linux drivers are maintained by the manufacturers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> I didn't realize Apple did this (not a Mac user personally). Didn't Microsoft get sued for providing their own Java runtime years ago? What is the difference here? (just out of interest) Obviously Sun/Oracle have been fine with it, so is it different to what Microsoft did?

<comment><USER61> What Microsoft shipped was not a conforming JVM. It couldn't interoperate with servers using the native Java RPC protocol (RMI), it couldn't use the same native code (JNI) libraries that any JVM would, and it couldn't verify signed packages (JAR). It also added nonstandard methods to standard classes, and any code which called them without reflection wouldn't even load on a JVM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> This whole thing happened when Java 1.6 came out. It took Apple forever to get it into OS X and there was a big fight for it. Now it's happening again. Must be a pain for Apple to manage it.

</comment><comment><USER63> Sounds significant, but how important is Apple/MacOS to Java?

<comment><USER64> Not _really_ as significant as one might think. This is just Apple saying, "we're discontinuing our own, internally developed and maintained JRE/JDK." I don't know off-hand how far this diverges from Sun/Oracle Java or IBM Java though (maybe someone else can step up with that information).

I didn't see anything saying that they would never distribute _any_ JRE on Mac OS X though. They may just find someone else's JRE to distribute.

<comment><USER65> If they help to maintain and distribute an alternative JRE (which could only really be OpenJDK, one would think) then it's good news for Java developers. On the other hand, if they don't distribute any and don't help to maintain it then it's a disaster. If the latter turns out to be true then I'd be pretty concerned if I was a Java developer (or if I used any of the JVM based languages).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> Aren't the CEOs of Apple & Oracle bestest friends in the whole world? Will it be long before Oracle/Sun picks up the slack on this?

</comment><comment><USER67> It's probably just wishful thinking, but here's hoping they're working on bringing some kind of newer managed environment to OS X.

</comment><comment><USER63> Speculative, but could this be an early preventative measure to keep JRuby from challenging their up and coming MacRuby platform?

<comment><USER7> "Their" up and coming MacRuby platform? Is that a joke?

<comment><USER63> Might I say, "the up and coming MacRuby platform Apple has designs for"? At least a couple of the committers are Apple employees. But I misattributed the project as being "theirs", which apparently isn't true.

<comment><USER68> Eh, it's Apple's in any meaningful way. The project is led by Apple's Laurent Sansonetti, hosted by Apple's Mac OS Forge, and Sansonetti has said that MacRuby is intended to replace RubyCocoa, which is currently bundled with Mac OS X. MacRuby also recently started making improvements to Apple's BridgeSupport framework. I don't know how much more an open-source project like MacRuby could do to deserve to be called "Apple's."

<comment><USER69> From the contact page:

MacRuby is a free software project by Apple Inc. Many folks inside and outside of Apple contribute to this great project and we have a MacRuby Project Team page to list them. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions, ideas or bugs to report.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> Does this mean that if you want to distribute a Java app bundle, you must package the JRE into it as a framework?

<comment><USER44> No, it means that Apple is not bringing Java 7 to OS X.

It doesn't prevent someone else from bringing Java 7 to OS X, nor does it mean that the existing support for Java 6 is going anywhere.

<comment><USER49> It also means that Apple has to apply fewer engineering resources to supporting Java.

OS X and iOS, full steam ahead !

<comment><USER14> For lengths of time, they only had one engineer on it by the name of Mike Swingler.

I can't speak for that today, but my source for this info was the Java Swing team themselves since they talked all the time with the Java "team" at Apple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Wait, I thought Oracle (Java's current owner) is Apple's friend, because of the lawsuit against Google's Android.

Head spinning.

<comment><USER72> I doubt Oracle suing Google was an effort to favor Apple. It was more to save their own Java platform in general and Java ME in particular.

<comment><USER73> Oh, please, it was more to earn some money out of the Sun acquisition.

Like they give a shit about the Java brand.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> So, Apple pretty much is out to eliminate anything that isn't Apple.

</comment><comment><USER75> the only pity may be eclipse.

</comment><comment><USER76> fuck oracle :)

<comment><USER77> Does anyone else use Oxygen on the mac. I've never found anything that comes close when working with XML. But judging from the clunky UI, I have to conclude it's written in Java. I wonder what they will ship in future, maybe the app with a JVM installer? JR</comment></comment>


Oracle: Coherence Community Edition - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.oracle.com/oraclecoherence/announcing-coherence-community-edition <comment><USER2> I wonder why they named the blog "coherence community edition" and not "open sourcing coherence". The license, although a bit unusual, seems to be a commercial friendly thing. What features are missing in this "community edition"?

<comment><USER3> The biggest features missing are cross cluster replication (federation), elastic data, and HotCache. There are also some WebLogic features not included but I would argue that the majority of the product is there. No limits on scale, and includes distributed disk persistence.</comment></comment>