Gartner tells IT shops that it's 'game over' for BlackBerry - <AUTHOR> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9242767/Update_Gartner_tells_IT_shops_that_it_s_game_over_for_BlackBerry

<comment><USER2> I work in an industry where Gartner used to maintain a magic quadrant. (C/ETRM software) I worked closely with the marketing director to fill out the questionnaire that Gartner sent. Iirc it was about 20 questions that asked about key functionality and product road maps. It literally was about 2 days (8 working hours) of back and forth between marketing, myself, product managers and c-level employees.

They filled this sheet out, sent it off and forgot about it. From 20 pretty generic questions that ended up being answered with some pretty fluffy and marketing jargon laden bullshit, Gartner is able to tell if someone is a market leading software vendor or not. It's total bullshit. It turns out that it was just 1 guy doing this quadrant as when he left, Gartner stopped doing it(at least that is what I e been told)

The company I worked at even sent 8 people to the Gartner conference in an effort to boost visibility and hopefully quadrant status. I can't believe anyone would take it seriously, let alone base a purchasing decision from it.

<comment><USER3> I view them like the ratings agencies. They exist because someone has to fill a void. For the ratings agencies, there is a void where people who don't have a lot of financial knowledge are placed on top of large sums of money. One could argue they shouldn't, but they're there, so they need someone to give them guidance on investments. Gartner exists similarly because there is a void in organizations and their knowledge of technology. In the absence of Gartner, the un-tech-savvy CIOs just buy from whoever they play golf with. We could argue that all CIOs should be hands on current in all the relevant technology, but that's not the world we live in.

An interesting question would be, "What's the return on investment in getting into the right quadrant?" It truly is a marketing decision that should be compared alongside advertising, conference attendance and direct mail.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Serious Question: Why does anyone care what Gartner think?

I have worked with companies that cared more about getting into some quadrant of some Gartner graph than they cared about the quality of their products.

Is Gartner more than just a corporate badge? Do they purely provide the wall for the giant corporate pissing contest?

<comment><USER5> To answer your question - Yes, they do.

I call this "shifting the burden of responsibility"[1] and it basically boils down to this - imagine you're an IT manager and your boss says "Should we support Blackberry anymore?" Who is the authority to say whether the answer is Yes or No to this question? If you (the IT manager) think you are...What happens when you're wrong? Hence why you simply shift this over to someone or some organization who has established themselves as the authority.

This is why the analyst industry exists.

[1] - [http://www.techdisruptive.com/2013/07/18/shifting-the- burden...](http://www.techdisruptive.com/2013/07/18/shifting-the-burden-of- responsibility/)

<comment><USER4> In my experience it isn't the IT managers who trust Gartner —it's the IT- managers' managers.

Is this just because non-IT managers don't trust what IT managers say?

If so then this is a case of shifting the burden of responsibility of "shifting the burden of responsibility". Non-IT managers blame IT managers for their use of analysts as a comfort blanket.

I realise there are analysts for all kinds of industry but I can't think of another example where analysts wield the kind of power that Gartner hold over the IT industry.

<comment><USER5> I think you're slightly taking my example too pedantically. In any case...

> _Is this just because non-IT managers don 't trust what IT managers say?_

Yes, but the non-IT managers are even more uninformed. Everyone at some point is to blame, unless you can point that blame outside of your organization. Imagine this conversation going all the way up to the CEO. "But Gartner said to stop supporting Blackberry" holds some good value to her.

> _Non-IT managers blame IT managers for their use of analysts as a comfort > blanket._

I'm sort of confused by this comment, is this a statement you're trying to make? Either way, as you said, the key decision maker is usually the non-IT managers (usually at VP level or higher).

> _I realise there are analysts for all kinds of industry but I can 't think > of another example where analysts wield the kind of power that Gartner hold > over the IT industry._

I don't know many other industries that (1) have so many solutions (2) available to them globally (3) at so many different price points (4) with such a complexity of features. Finance rings a bell, but the competition is _much_ higher.

Some good comments about the woes of the analyst industry in big tech: [http://blog.softwareinsider.org/2013/08/09/personal-log- the-...](http://blog.softwareinsider.org/2013/08/09/personal-log-the-sad- state-of-the-industry-analyst-business-and-the-need-for-a-code-of-ethics/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I am kind of pissed that Microsoft hasn't been hitting the Enterprise Phone hard. I have a lot of people I consult for on mobile sec stuff who are still on bb7, never will BYOD, and who need something essentially bb7 equivalent for secure email/messaging/etc. They were willing to tolerate RIM as a partner due to the extensive security audits and certification of the platform, but probably wouldn't trust Apple or Google with the ability to push arbitrary code to their devices.

<comment><USER7> With iOS 7 supporting per-app VPN, you can couple that with corporate provisioning to require particular apps for company email, messaging, file markup, _and_ require those apps to only work over the company VPN.

What's more, given that Microsoft is known to have shipped backdoored code, and known to have been the fastest to cooperate with NSA etc., it's not clear where your last sentence comes from, that someone would trust MSFT code before Apple and Google code.

That said, yes, Windows phone absolutely should have had an enterprise push to appeal to the IT crowd depending on Active Directory, Exchange, Sharepoint, etc. They should have sidestepped the iOS vs Android battle and defined a "blue ocean" strategy with two prongs: (1) corporate/enterprise (targeting IT departments and white collar wage earners), (2) feature/smart phones (targeting kids in those households).

While iOS and Android (as seen in Apple, Samsung, and Droid adverts) are competing to be fiercely individualist choices, MSFT should have gone after groups/communities/companies/families. Groupware is a recognized Microsoft strength.

<comment><USER6> The kind of people still using BB7 (in the US/UK/CA are likely to strongly trust NSA, so MS NSA backdoors aren't really a problem; NSA IA review is a feature for them.

I agree iOS 7 has the best security and security functionality right now of iOS or Android, but there isn't a single out of the box solution which does what BES/bb7 provides. Setting up Apple's config manager is a pain, and the commercial MDM products aren't amazing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's amazing that BlackBerry can sell almost 6 million phones a quarter and be considered a failure.

Sure, other products vastly outsell it and it's been "defeated" in a product category it created. But in most other markets moving 6 million units of a product that costs over $100, in just 3 months, ought to mean you get to stick around indefinitely, at least as a niche player.

<comment><USER9> Maybe... What is their sales trend though? I haven't bothered to look into myself, but based on what we see and hear, my assumption would be that BB sales are going down.

There are still lots of legacy BB shops, and those shops are still hiring new employees, replacing lost or outdated phones and so forth. BB may be selling 6 million units per quarter, but if they are losing marketshare rapidly (as they appear to be), those sales most likely aren't worth much. Additionally, if they are staffed up for 20 million units a month (eg: tons of office space, lots of personnel), then 6 million is not enough to sustain the company. We've already seen signs of this in the form of massive layoffs.

Also, this isn't a market where you can stagnate, so they won't be around indefinitely unless they have the R&D team to keep pace with new trends, plus create a couple of innovations.

<comment><USER10> That's exactly the right question to ask. When they were selling 15M phones a year or two ago, selling 5-6M M phones today is a disaster, especially when the trend continues downward after releasing the BB10 which was supposed to "save" BlackBerry. Then add the fact that they had to take a big loss on unsold BB10 inventory, and the picture is pretty bleak.

They can probably stick around for a long time as a niche player, but that's not going to provide the kind of big returns that the investors expect.

<comment><USER8> "Bad deal for investors" is something I can't disagree with. I sure wouldn't put any money in them.

This doesn't mean that they're going to go out of business and everyone needs to race to abandon ship, though.

<comment><USER10> No, but the outlook is uncertain. There's a history of solid mobile platforms being abandoned much more quickly than most would expect: Symbian, WM6, Palm, Sidekick (including the spectacular Microsoft data deletion screwup), so to not make contingency / transition plans now when BlackBerry is officially up for sale would be irresponsible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> [http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9242808/BlackBerry_re...](http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9242808/BlackBerry_responds_to_Gartner_s_call_for_clients_to_ditch_BB_products_)

</comment><comment><USER12> What a joke. It's like stating AltaVista is 'game over'.

</comment><comment><USER13> Classy move, Gartner. Did you just move from the bullshit quadrant to the racket quadrant?

</comment><comment><USER14> Has Netcraft confirmed it too?

</comment><comment><USER15> Who will take over enterprise phones now? Microsoft will definitely try, but how will Apple and Android compete for this space?

<comment><USER10> Android and Apple already do compete for this space. They both provide provisioning, encrypted storage, VPN, exchange support and remote wipe, and that's pretty much what 90% of the enterprise needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> i'd buy an android Q10 in a heartbeat.

<comment><USER17> Z10, too. BB10 devices are beautiful, they're just duct-taped to a dead-end OS and came too late to save the company. Also, going with non-discoverable gesture-based navigation was a doomed idea. I get what they're going for, but when you're scrambling to keep your users you don't want to create that kind of huge barrier for them.

If only. Even if BBOS was forked from an old version of android (like, 2.3 or something) you'd still have some baseline of compatibility, a place to build an ecosystem.

<comment><USER16> they could have made BBOS a fork like kindle os is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> What does the President use these days?

</comment><comment><USER19> Hey Gartner, Dell dude got busted selling pot...</comment>


Arch fiends in Paradise: What happens when lexicographers fight - <AUTHOR> https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/the-dictionary-wars-peter-martin-reviewkory-stamper/ <comment><USER2> Somewhat connected: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21818730](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21818730)

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://archive.md/9qmD1](https://archive.md/9qmD1)</comment>


M.I.A.'s album "/\/\/\Y/\" is ungoogleable - <AUTHOR> http://www.hipsterrunoff.com/2010/05/did-m-i-a-eff-up-by-giving-her-album-an-un-google-able-name.html

<comment><USER2> this reminds me of Super Discount 2 released by Etienne De Crecy in 2004. He named each track after a p2p client, thereby search-obscuring the titles.

1\. Poisoned 2\. Fast Track 3\. Grokster 4\. Morpheus 5\. Bit Torrent 6\. Audio Galaxy 7\. G2 8\. Soul Seek 9\. Gifted 10\. Limewire 11\. Overnet

</comment><comment><USER3> It's quite a problem. I'd really appreciate if google could just let me search for strings i put in quotes exactly the way they are.

Recently I wanted to google stuff about the windowmanager i3. It was quite difficult, even with queries like "i3 windowmanger".

<comment><USER4> +1. Case in point: Today I was thinking about a problem: "Maybe I need a something like a "reduce-map" function here; maybe that would be the right metaphore for what I want the program to do here." I wanted to know whether this thought had any currency, so I googled _program "reduce-map"_ :

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=program+%22reduce-m...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=program+%22reduce- map%22)

And got back a slew of map-reduce tutorials.

Still don't know whether that "reduce-map" idea is a dead end.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In the long run, this probably won't matter, people will just search for "mia new album" and find it just fine.

<comment><USER6> At best it will not matter that much, but it will not help spreading the news.

How will people search for the album after the next one comes out? "Mia album previous"

I think this is when cool gets in the way of usability.

(On the other hand, I am talking about the album right now, so if this was a marketing stunt, to get geeks talk about M.I.A, than it worked)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If enough people search for it, Google picks up on it and adds in some sort of override to the no-punctuation rule. This is why "C#" and "F#" return different results from "C" and "F", but "Z#" gets no such benefit. Other times the exceptions apply to broad patterns of letters, since any single letter with "++" appended will give specific results even if it's not the name of anything (try "y++"), but + signs are in general ignored ("+++what-- is+happening--" gives the same results as "what is happening").

</comment><comment><USER8> I'll give $20 to the first AMAZON-listed band with a SQL-injection album name.

"'); DROP TABLE ARTISTS"

(Yes, #327)

</comment><comment><USER9> Sigur Ros put out an album a few years back titled _()_. Yes, an empty pair of parentheses. It took me forever to even find a store that carried it because searching web sites couldn't hope to get any result.

I did eventually find a copy, though.

Edit: Hah, zero Google results, period! How's that for un-Googlable?

<comment><USER10> You should have tried googling for 'sigur ros parentheses'.

<comment><USER11> ^ google-fu -- red sash awarded! eighteen terms of googshu completed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> "Pick a band name that no one else has so that it will show up first in google ... Pick an album name that is a made up word that no1 has ever even typed ... Name a song after some phrase that will get you accidental google hits."

These 3 things together make no sense to me. On the one hand it's suggesting to pick unique band names and albums, and then suggesting to pick regular phrases for songs that might get "accidental" hits.

If there's a benefit to getting said accidental hits, wouldn't this work for a band name? Surely Grizzly Bear would benefit from this? And I don't htink it's a real issue if your band name isn't top of the list because you are competing with 'real bears'; people aren't going to give up finding you if you are 4th on the list, or they have to type "grizzly bear band" in the search instead.

</comment><comment><USER13> However, '"/ / / Y/" album' does work as well as "/\/\/\Y/\ new album"

seems like "\" of each "\/" is treated as escape character

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=/\/\/\Y/\\+new+album](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=/\\/\\/\\Y/\\+new+album)

and

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=/+/+/+Y/+album](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=/+/+/+Y/+album)

<comment><USER14> You forgot the word "new" in your second search, which is why you get different results. Those characters are being entirely ignored. You get the exact same results by searching for "Y new album"

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Chrome's Translate feature has let me down.

What language is the comment thread in?

</comment><comment><USER16> _Does n e 1 know how google works?_

It took me a while to understand that "n e 1" is actually "anyone".

<comment><USER17> We are spoiled here on HN.

Sometimes this "txt spk" makes my eyes bleed :(

<comment><USER18> It's somewhat shocking that people write like this nearly _everywhere_. Tech sites and even many astronomy sites are no exception (e.g., Wired or Astronomy Now).

<comment><USER19> I think it's more generational than anything, as far as informal discussion goes. I don't use it, but I sometimes get called out by people older than me for using other abbreviations, like the typical internet stuff (fwiw, imo, etc.). I've even been criticized for using contractions in some settings, even though nobody under 40 cares about that (fortunately, consensus even in academic writing is moving towards "contractions are ok"). Not sure "n e 1" will go that way, but I can't say I care _that_ much either way.

It's basically the bit.ly links of English: annoying in some ways that they didn't just write the normal thing out, and also annoying that stupid length restrictions like those of SMS and Twitter are encouraging both of them, but I'll live.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I was looking at issues with integrating Amazon's products into my job's website a few years ago and I ran into an album called: [+++++]. I'd link to it, but Amazon's search can't find it and I don't remember what category it was under

</comment><comment><USER21> On the plus side - an artist can be sure that piracy of their badly named album will also be low, since people won't be able to find it in the torrent search engines as well.

</comment><comment><USER22> "Can M.I.A. call the Google CEO and tell him to 'index her shit'? Does n e 1 know how google works? Is there like an old guy who has to go through a file cabinet 2 find results for you every time you search for something?"

So the author knows what SEO stands for, but doesn't know the answer to this? Please. My impression is that this guy is intentionally trying to downplay his knowledge to avoid being labeled a "computer geek" by the hipsters in his audience.

<comment><USER23> I don't think this is his intention at all. You can't take HRO remotely seriously.

This is simply the tone/style of his writing, read more of the blog - it's all just a joke/satire.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> It should be googleable on this version of google though:

<http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=xx-hacker>

</comment><comment><USER6> M.I.A.'s album is also "untorrentable".

<comment><USER25> Really? That made me LOL!

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I don't think this will have much impact on sales. You can just search for M.I.A.

It's because mysql_real_escape_string, which many sites use, escapes all \ with /\\. So on many sites (not nessessarily Google, you will actually be searching for //\//\//\Y//\?

</comment><comment><USER27> I can think of a couple bands with names that give zero results on google: "!!!" and "+/-".

Though ungoogleable, I see they are "amazonable".

<comment><USER28> Searching for "plus slash minus" does bring up correct results. So does searching "chk chk chk" (i don't know why people call them this, I haven't heard of the band until today, but amazon told me this was a related search so I tried it on google).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> more than likely people will just search for: MIA maya album.

I think something similar happened with a few smaller bands back in the p2p days who tried to make themselves 'unsearchable' and therefore 'unpirateable'. Pirates always find a way.

<comment><USER28> Case in point: searching for "plus slash minus" to find the band "+/-"

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I reckon this is clever. It makes it far more difficult to illegally share the album.

</comment><comment><USER30> i'll google my new album. upss.</comment>


Apple fined $1.2B by French antitrust authorities - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/16/apple-fined-1point2-billion-by-french-competition-authorities.html <comment><USER2> $1.2B appropriate? It's hard for me to tell in this case because I don't know the size of the market they colluded to capture.

Did Apple gain more than $1.2B in profits? Is this just a cost of doing business? There are so many cases when the fine is worth the expense, like advertising.

I would much rather see a corporation be banned from a sector for a period of time when they get caught, in addition to a fine.

Wells Fargo gets caught creating fake credit card accounts for customers? Wells Fargo can no longer sign up new credit card customers for 2 years.

Equafax leaked everyone's social security numbers? You are banned from accepting new customers for 3 years.

The punishments I'm suggesting are off-the-cuff but some sort of corporate business practice penalty is more fitting than just a fine.

It also gives the company time to correct the problem before they continue to do business in that sector.

<comment><USER3> The corporation has owners and operators. These fines rightfully hit the owners. I would suggest that fines also hit the operators.

If Tim Cook paid $200 million dollar fine or went to jail for 15 days for this, internal controls and compliance would be rock solid.

I think of the Madoff scandal. If Greg Katz[1], Saul Katz[2] and Fred Wilpon[3] had been jailed, we might avoid the next company that followed Sterling Equities lead in enable a huge fraud. These guys were next to the fraud for 20 years and skated with a fine. Just an example.

Punish individuals not just companies. James Surowiecki wrote about it in the New Yorkerin 2014, SEC chair Chair Jay Clayton has mentioned it in 2017, and Biden mentioned it last night in the debate.

[1] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participants_in_the_Madoff_i...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participants_in_the_Madoff_investment_scandal#Greg_Katz)

[2] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Katz#Madoff_Ponzi_Schem...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Katz#Madoff_Ponzi_Scheme)

[3] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Wilpon#Madoff_investmen...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Wilpon#Madoff_investment_scandal)

<comment><USER4> I, for one, would be immediately leaving my C-level position in a startup out of the fear that one of my colleagues is doing something terribly wrong behind my back. I - really - dont think that's the cas. But if there is the slightest chance that I might end up behind bars and get my life upside down because a judge thinks I am responsible as well, I will close the company and fire all employees - it's just not worth it.

<comment><USER5> Your colleagues, maybe not, but certainly you are culpable for your direct reports. And we are not talking about rogue employees here performing one-off acts such as absconding with private/privileged data, but rather an institution-wide mode of operation that is deliberate and determined by a favourable cost-profit analysis.

Yes, if you advocate that or even tacitly support it, you should definitely stand to lose your shirt. If that's too much for you, gardening is always available as an occupation. Others will be happy to fill your shoes.

Ex: If you are the CEO of Juul, you definitely need to go to jail. I see Juul marketed to kids everywhere. Once science confirms that it's just as harmful as cigarettes, I want all the C-levels in jail and their fortunes stripped. I don't for one second believe that they thought such a product could not possibly be harmful. They are there to make a profit, end-user health be damned.

<comment><USER6> There's no way that ecigs are as harmful as cigs, so you might be waiting a long time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In the past, I believe Apple has certainly placed limits on what prices Wal- Mart or Amazon could sell Apple products at, to avoid the appearance of them being "discounted" or customers shopping around -- your iPhone is $x99 no matter where you buy it, period. (They seem to have loosened up somewhat since.)

Should that be illegal? For a company to say "I'll sell you this wholesale stock only on the condition you only resell it for exactly $x and never less."

Is there a meaningful distinction here from supermarkets in an area colluding to sell all milk an inflated price? Or is it really the same anti-consumer, anti-competitive behavior in the end?

And I wonder to what extent it has to do with defining the price on an entire category of items (milk) vs a single company (you can always buy an Android instead).

I don't know the answer, so just curious if there's any kind of consensus conclusion here by economists.

<comment><USER8> A single company setting a price for its own product, for which viable alternatives exist in the same category at different price points, is a very different animal than a group of suppliers using their monopoly status on a product category to inflate prices for their own profit.

<comment><USER9> Except that it's exactly what allows that to happen.

If MegaCorp says they sell widgets wholesale for $7 and you must sell them retail for $10, everybody sells them retail for $10 and makes $3. Meanwhile BigCorp does the same thing for for the widgets they make and all the widgets retail for $10. Nobody can lower their prices except the manufacturers who are few enough to be secretly colluding, so no price competition commences.

Without this, BoxCo starts buying widgets for $7 and retailing them for $9. Which, immediately, is a lower price for the consumer. Then another shop without BoxCo's scale starts pressuring MegaCorp to give them widgets for $6.50 instead of $7 so they can compete with BoxCo's $9, which the manufacturer wants because they don't want BoxCo to have a retail monopoly on their goods. So now more retailers are selling for $9 retail to the benefit of the customer.

Then BigCorp has to lower their wholesale prices so their retailers can compete with MegaCorp retailers selling for $9, and so on.

Price fixing is enabled by fixing prices.

Or to put it another way, enforced MSRP is a conspiracy to fix prices on the part of the retailers coordinated through the manufacturer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is good news. Wish we had more pro-active government actions like this to protect us consumers!

</comment><comment><USER11> So I'm looking at the prices of Chanel No 5 eau de parfum 1.7 oz.

      Sephora   $105.00
      Macys     $105.00
      Nordstrom $105.00

Gee, what a coincidence.

<comment><USER12> The fact that an USA company breaks the law in France doesn't mean that French companies do not break your local laws.

Jurisdiction of commerce is where the buyer is, not the HQ location. Therefore your example is useless.

<comment><USER13> Unless your point is that the pricing is actually varied in France, this antitrust decision reads like selective enforcement of market regulations -- protectionism.

<comment><USER12> I disagree.

A company cannot regulate prices in France, USA or French. A French company may regulate prices in the USA if the law allows it.

The provenance of a company has nothing to do about the market regulation of the buyer country of residence.

This is not a French ideology, this is a French law that is only applicable in France territory.

<comment><USER13> > The provenance of a company has nothing to do about the market regulation of > the buyer country of residence.

I agree, it shouldn't. The question at hand is whether it does , despite this.

<comment><USER12> Then you argue about sovereignty.

Any country will never let the law of a foreign country apply to commerce done on its territory. Saying otherwise is heresy.

<comment><USER13> To revisit your earlier statement:

> The provenance of a company has nothing to do about the market regulation of > the buyer country of residence.

If a law is selectively enforced against foreign entities, provenance suddenly does matter. That is my only point. It undermines the spirit of free trade and invites retaliation, leaving everyone worse off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The implied populism is disturbing. There are no facts presented, everyone is jumping on memes.

The TC article [1] has considerably more information though still missing some fine points.

The details of the charges are not going to benefit from transparency, as it doesn't look like some kind of solid case - it seems that Apple was engaged in some otherwise normal business practices.

They required their resellers to sell at certain price points, and during times of short supply, they favoured some channels over others. This is not anti-competitive really, it's normal practice.

If the French government applied such rules fairly and broadly there are probably any number of businesses that would be found to be committing such practices.

The French have been outdone in so many areas, they're now engaged in a new form of a trade war, which is simply to grab surpluses of foreign companies as they can. And who, even among intelligent, literate people who are responsible enough to grasp material facts is going to care one bit?

It's perfectly fine if France and the EU want to be more assertive in applying their legislation, but the rules have to be clear, they have to be applied impartially and universally, not in a punitive manner.

Even better, France needs to produce exceptional companies that produce surpluses - much better to be in a situation where you have 'the great companies' and the risk is having someone DJ Trump screaming murder, as opposed to digging up dirt on otherwise well run companies in your own borders.

Also - the EU's ridiculous taxation scheme, which allows Google and FB to declare most of their profits in Ireland and skip paying taxes in France is _their_ problem, not the problem of foreign nationals who are just following the laws. The architect of said massive loopholes is none other than outgoing EU Commission Pres. JC Junker, so the hypocrisy there is nigh.

[1] [https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/16/apple-fined- record-1-2b-in...](https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/16/apple-fined- record-1-2b-in-france-over-anti-competitive-sales-practices/)

<comment><USER15> > The French have been outdone in so many areas, they're now engaged in a new > form of a trade war, which is simply to grab surpluses of foreign companies > as they can. And who, even among intelligent, literate people who are > responsible enough to grasp material facts is going to care one bit?

When the US fines foreign banks, VW group and others for incredibly higher amounts of money, it's fair-game but when France fines a US company after an 8 years investigation, it's not, and the authorities don't even get the benefit of doubt that maybe they know what they are doing and have a solid case? You don't have any basis to make such a statement that this is only about some revenge.

France was one of the top markets for Apple and had 20 years ago a vibrant network of small retailers dedicated to Apple hardware (without comparison with the distribution situation in the USA). That went downhill once Apple started its online store and then its physical stores. Maybe it's just survival of the fittest, or maybe Apple also tipped the balance in a way that's not ethical or maybe even not legal. That's why we have such government bodies as "Autorité de la Concurrence".

> it seems that Apple was engaged in some otherwise normal business practices.

The "Autorité de la Concurrence" probably has the best grasp compared to anyone on HN regarding what is "normal business practices" and what the law allows in France, which is not the USA.

From TC article, the accusations are rather quite specific:

</comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>=====

The competition commissioner noted that Apple and its partners violated three specific areas:

— Apple and the two wholesalers agreed not to compete with each other and also to prevent other distributors to compete on price, "thereby sterilizing the wholesale market for Apple products."

— Secondly, premium distributors were forced to keep prices high to keep them at the same level as those of integrated distributors.

— Third, Apple has "abused the economic dependence" of these premium distributors, by subjecting them to unfair and unfavorable commercial conditions compared to its network of integrated distributors. (These last two points relate specifically to the accusations eBizcuss had lodged against the company.)

</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>=====

It was a known fact at the time (10 years back or so) that independent Apple retailers were not getting stock from Apple for certain products and therefore couldn't meet demand from their customers. There were even some "hot" products that could only be bought from apple.com or its own physical stores. I don't know if some of these practices were illegal or not (that's why we have government bodies to act as arbiters and enforcers of the rules), but it certainly didn't help the retailers.

There's some more details in [https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/03/16/concurren...](https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/03/16/concurrence- apple-ecope-d-une-amende-inedite-en-france-de-1-1-milliard-d- euros_6033256_3234.html).

<comment><USER14> >>>> "When the US fines foreign banks, VW group and others for incredibly higher amounts of money, it's fair-game"

Who said this is 'fair game'?

>>>>> "France was one of the top markets for Apple and had 20 years ago a vibrant network "

A) '20 years ago' Apple was a completely different company, they were 1/20th the size. They are a completely different company, in every way.

B) 'France was one of the top markets'? Apple sales in France have dramatically increased during this time - so I don't understand this point.

C) Apple can distribute generally how they please as long as they're not breaking the law.

>>>> "The "Autorité de la Concurrence" probably has the best grasp compared to anyone on HN regarding what is "normal business practices"

So your argument is _' trust the authority of the French government because their logic is infallible'_ \- while in the very same comment expressing that the US is engaged in 'arbitrary fining of foreign banks'?

No, we should not trust them at all, we should demand transparency.

>>>> As far as the specific points of law:

1) "Agreeing not to compete with one another". Really? Or is it that Apple required them to sell at specific prices - which is a very common practice.

If you are Apple, why would you engage in price collusion, which is illegal everywhere, when you can dictate end prices? You can 'force' the wholesalers 'not to compete' \- this happens in every industry, all the time, and it's not illegal.

2) "premium distributors were forced to keep prices high"

This is not generally illegal and it's common practice!

3) "Apple has "abused the economic dependence" " \- this is merely a claim, there's no substance behind it.

>>>>>>>>>>> "It was a known fact at the time that independent Apple retailers were not getting stock from Apple for certain products"

Having an amazingly hot product that is selling out everywhere is not illegal, and favoring some channels over others is not either.

But all of this is missing the point:

\- Governments, US or French, applying regulatory law is important, obviously, it's important that actions are applied broadly, judiciously and with merit.

Swiss banks have been hiding tax cheaters, so it's pretty reasonable that the US would go after them. As far as other Trump-era fines, well it depends, obviously, he's engaged in some nasty stuff, but it doesn't justify the other way around.

\- France is using their political and legal apparatuses as a means to grab revenue. Their economy is weak, they see this 'big American firns' making tons of cash, and they want some money. This is partly the motivation and its sad.

\- There's a number of laws they could change that would more fairly derive revenue derived from Apple, FB, Google, for example, local taxes on ads, and of course, fixing the massive EU tax loopholes. This would be more consistent with 'good governance'.

\- All of this is the loser's strategy. What they need is their own champions, which should be the primary focus. This will entail a whole set of reforms, and the willing effort and participation of the public at large as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> France seem to be one of the few countries willing to openly challenge Apple's hegemony, be it planned obscelence, or colluding with distributors.

Why isn't the EU enacting this at the continent level? And why is the US asleep at the wheel?

<comment><USER17> In the US corporations buy, sell and trade lawmakers like kids once traded baseball cards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Failing European economies where the workers look down on technical work will continue to look for ways to tax US corporations. Apple may have some monopolistic practices, but a larger problem in Europe is as I stated, a work force not inclined, interested, and put off by the "low status" of being a programmer. They will continue to pursue aggressive legal tactics to stop the domination of FAANG tech products, but the real answer is legislation and action that foster growth of tech companies and start ups.

<comment><USER19> You're getting downvoted to oblivion for telling the truth, because that truth is painful and tastes horrible.

The EU is going to unleash tens of billions in fines at US tech companies in the coming decade, because they can't compete and now they have a large hole in their budget thanks to the Brexit [1], which can conveniently be filled with fines. It's obvious what they're going to do.

The only proper response is subtle economic war on the part of the US directed at France and Germany. And we will do exactly that. We'll use every practical lever we possess to harm their corporations in retribution. It's fair game. It's a mistake on the part of the EU, the US is radically stronger in every respect. If they're not careful, the EU will end up as an economic colony of China - perhaps appropriate given history.

[1] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-budget/eu-leaders- to-c...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-budget/eu-leaders-to-clash- over-money-as-brexit-blows-hole-in-budget-idUSKBN20D2V0)

"European Union leaders will clash this week over the EU's 2021-2027 budget as Britain's exit leaves a 75 billion euro ($81 billion) hole in the bloc's finances just as it faces costly challenges such as becoming carbon neutral by 2050. "

<comment><USER20> The EU's total GDP is $18.8 trillion, which is very close to the GDP of the US, and much larger than the GDP of China.

The total EU budget is much less than 1% of that, and is entirely discretionary spending on long-term strategic policy goals, infrastructure, and social investment.

And having a "costly" challenge of becoming carbon neutral by 2050 is a lot more realistic than the US policy on carbon neutrality, which is "We'll get back to you on that, but probably not until the coastal flooding and economy- destroying extreme weather events becomes impossible to ignore."

<comment><USER21> Yes, but the EU budget is special in several ways.

One is that they can't directly control most tax rates. The EU isn't funded by direct income taxation, for instance. But they can raise funds via fines, which aren't tried in court and go directly into the EU's own budget (there's a huge conflict of interest here).

Another is that the EU's budget normally only ever goes up. It's a part of the whole plan for the EU to constantly subsume more and more from national governments. The obvious view of the EU is it has a budget so it can provide services but this isn't how the EU officials themselves see it. That's why the fight over the Brexit budget hole is so bitter. Someone unfamiliar with the EU might think, well, the EU is smaller now, so it should be just fine with a correspondingly smaller budget. But it's not that way because the size of the budget is psychological. If it shrinks it's the project going into reverse, not a mere re-allocation of service resources.

I think we keep seeing dubious fines by the EU against US tech firms and although it's unpopular, I tend to agree with adventured. A lot of these fines are enormous and backed by no real robust system of justice. A government simply decrees without trial that a tech firm must pay them a billion euros. A billion here, a few hundred million there - it starts to add up. From the EU perspective sucking gold out of tech firms is not only free money but even better, populist free money, because they can demonise these companies and claim to be fighting for the consumer. Whether they actually are or not doesn't get a close look.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is going to keep happening.

The App Store has been poison to Apple and I've no idea why they didn't see it coming.

<comment><USER23> This has nothing to do with the App Store. It's about colluding to price-fix with their French wholesalers. FTA:

> _"Apple and its two wholesalers agreed not to compete and prevent > distributors from competing with each other, thereby sterilizing the > wholesale market for Apple products"_

<comment><USER24> Classic anti-trust case. In cases like this I always wonder whether corps like Apple already priced the fines in or not. But than there is still the perosonal liability angle.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: When should we start talking to the press? - <AUTHOR>

Dear HN,
(First submission to HN, long time reader - so a bit excited :) )
We've been building a SiteBuilder that doesn't suck for quite a while(self funded), now approaching our launch(4-5 month) we are starting to reach out for angel investors.
Some of the features we plan on launching are pretty cool and we think we will create buzz around them and in fact - we've got some news corp journalists that already want to profile us.
We are considering going with the flow - reaching out to bloggers -  optimizing on the right bloggers to work with - breaking the news of our fresh vision and making some buzz.
Would appreciate if experienced people here would share their perspective, here is our way of thinking: pros:
- sometimes going with the flow just works - will make it faster for us to raise money(especially taking into account that the SiteBuilder market is packed with competition) - if we generate buzz and play our cards right(communicating ourselves smartly) we could use this as a marketing platform. cons:
- our first version will probably suck and we might get press backlash for it - maybe the buzz while launching will be smaller(since we already used some of our buzz generating energy on the pre launch buzz).
Thanks Eytan <comment><USER2> A question that I would pose to you is 'Do you already have an internal PR campaign started'?

In other words, how are you keeping your 'targets' up to date with company progress and milestones? By targets I mean prospective investors, board members, and advisors.

Getting into the groove of keeping these people up to date is good practice for understanding what might be relevant from the perspective of an investor. It also puts you on their radar so that when you do get that big TC coverage, that could be the thing that compels them to say 'I'm in'.

On the other hand, skipping the internal pr and going straight for big coverage leads investors to say something like 'You're on my radar now... lets talk' and at that point you are going to have to keep them up to date with your progress anyway as part of the 'dance' that leads to funding.

So my opinion is to start an internal PR campaign keeping prospective stakeholders up to date with progress and milestones and keeping them warm and socialized, then when you get the TC/VB press, it serves to pump up the social proof aspect of how cool your company is.

Then your prospective angels can say 'Oh yea, I've been watching those guys since before the TC spread came out, I knew they were something'. People like to be ahead of the curve.

Hopefully this helps, or hopefully this gives you more questions than answers. Either way, I would like to see this thread not get buried.</comment>


Stanford Seminar – The Rust Programming Language - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5vzLKg7y-k <comment><USER2> Needs a 2015 in the title. An oldie but goodie!

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about that. My fault. But, you're right. One year's difference is very meaningful... especially in Rust.

(Note to self: Wow! THE STEVE KLABNIK corrected me.)

<comment><USER2> I think "corrected" is quite strong :)</comment></comment></comment>


ReproducibleBuilds - <AUTHOR> https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds <comment><AUTHOR> Would something like this be possible for npm? Why/not?</comment>


Show HN: My small iOS game done during stay in hospital - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pick-it-right/id911310982?mt=8

<comment><USER2> Nice!</comment>


Is Instagram Bigger Than Facebook? - <AUTHOR> http://philpearlman.com/2012/09/28/is-instagram-bigger-than-facebook/

<comment><USER2> According to my friend who is a junior high school teacher the kids nowadays are using Instagram and Kik to communicate with each other. They all "maintain" FB profiles for their parents to see but the real action is happening on those two social media platforms.</comment>


Ask HN: How's your experience running Linux on a macbook? - <AUTHOR> I'm currently in the process of moving which means giving up my Arch Linux desktop and taking my macbook with me. So I was curious how is anyones experience running Arch on a macbook? <comment><USER2> In general, slightly older MacBooks are better supported.

Some UI issues: out of the box, right mouse clicks are two finger taps, which is OK, but I like the option of also using something like control-tap.

I just replaced my wife's 6 year old MacBook Air, and I put the latest Ubuntu on it this week. It is a 32 bit machine, so no Linux Google Chrome, and installing a few things like SpiderOak took some extra time to get right, but everything runs well, although slowly since the machine is ancient. Getting a one or two year old MacBook and using Linux should be fine.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I'm currently running at 2014 Retina model so I'm hoping it won't be that bad. Thanks for your advice!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I run linux in virtual box (with vagrant) as a server on my macbook. I'm using Ubuntu, It works fine. I start it and stop it as needed.

You could boot directly into linux using bootcamp, bu not sure how well that will work. Drivers might be an issue.</comment>


EmitKnowledge - the new knowledge based social platform. - <AUTHOR> http://www.emitknowledge.com/Home

<comment><AUTHOR> After the wonderful period of brain storming and development, we proudly announce EmitKnowledge, the new knowledge based social platform. Please feel free to register and start spreading your knowledge. All feedback is welcome!</comment>


Zero to Million: Acquiring customers & building a brand on a shoe-string budget - <AUTHOR> http://blog.shareaholic.com/2011/04/zero-to-million-acquiring-customers-and-building-a-brand-and-on-shoe-string-budget/

<comment><USER2> Great preso on user acquisition with real numbers.

</comment><comment><USER3> I love shareaholic! LOVE!</comment>


You say god is dead? There's an app for that - <AUTHOR> http://nyti.ms/aAXZek

<comment><USER2> i wish there were less so-called iPhone apps that are basically just text and images. i have a sneaking suspicion they could have been done as web pages accessible in the built-in Safari. They would also be much faster to market, cheaper to develop, immune to Apple censorship and banning whims, more portable to other platforms, more future proof, instantly updateable, cause less store clutter/noise, allow a wider variety of payment methods, can be done with any language/tech mix you want, and, and... that's enough for now. :)

<comment><USER3> >allow a wider variety of payment methods

But I bet it'd see far far fewer purchases. Unless/until there's a widespread essentially one-click purchase capability for ~$0.99 content on the web, web text/image content will have to remain ad-supported.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _Both sides come to the discussion with fixed ideas, and you have what amounts to a contest between different types of fundamentalism_

Sorry, I can't let that go without correction. Fundamentalism is interpretation of every word in sacred texts as literal truth. There is no sacred text for atheists by definition. Atheist beliefs can change, and indeed would change, if verifiable proof of a diety was forthcoming. Fundamentalist beliefs can't change -- big difference.

<comment><USER5> > Atheist beliefs can change, and indeed would change, if verifiable proof of > a diety was forthcoming.

How do you know this, when many simpler things in life have "proof", yet many still are in denial about them? (Read: the moon landings and the Holocaust.) Stubborness is stubborness, regardless of origin of belief. Whether or not a text is considered "sacred" or not is irrelevant if people dogmatically follow what is written anyways.

For the record, I consider myself agnostic. I tried being athiest in the past, and found their writings, Internet fourms, and discussion culture just as poisoned and tedious as the "born again" types I spent much of my life around. A plague on both your houses!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Best line in the story ...

"Indeed, the new phone applications seem to promise hours of unrelieved, humorless argument."

</comment><comment><USER7> I know this is OT but did they seriously register _nyti.ms_ ? Shessh.

It's like watching your 60 year old parents try to be "cool".

<comment><USER8> Google has goo.gl. The New York Times has nyti.ms. They're not trying to be cool. There are serious practical advantages to controlling your own URL shortener. People are going to shorten your URLs whether or not you have one, and having your own lets you collect data about how people are using it.</comment></comment>


Writing modern C++ code: how C++ has evolved over the years - <AUTHOR> http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/TOOL-835T

<comment><USER2> This is an excellent talk -- highly recommended if you know (or want to know) anything about C++. But it leaves me with a big question.

For anyone who has done C++ over the years, and made an effort to be type- and exception-safe, and efficient, these new features are a breath of fresh air. But what about people who haven't?

C++ is a huge language. Sutter seems to be saying that there is a nice, relatively small subset that is usable, safe, and efficient -- if you understand the issues. But do you need to? For example, the discussion on raw pointers at 27:45. Raw pointers are perfectly fine if the ownership and lifetime issues are all aligned correctly, he says. Great. For those who have been writing C++ for a decade and know all about ownership and lifetime and new and delete and reference counting and the rules for calling destructors and exception safety, no problem. What about people who are new to C++?

As I say, C++ is huge. The original ANSI C++ was gigantic. C++11 is a behemoth whose totality is beyond the comprehension of any mere mortal not named "Herb Sutter". There is a small subset that is usable and cool and awesome, _if_ you know about much of the rest. What if you don't? Is C++11 a language that non- experts can use? Is it a language I can effectively introduce to new computer science students?

I don't know. Does anyone?

P.S. I found it funny that, amid all this nifty, modern code, in the slide that appears at 52:38, he throws a char *. Does he really think that's a good idea?

</comment><comment><USER3> I have not written production C++ in over 5 years. For those of you who are still in the trenches with C++, do you view this as an improvement?

Put another way... Which would you view as the better engineering investment: refactoring/rewriting code with these new models of C++ --or-- investing in porting to a managed environment such as C# or Python or <insert language here>?

I confess I'm a purist. I miss Good Old Fashioned C++. This feels like lipstick on a pig. Actually, it's worse than that. It feels like my 60 year old mother trying to dress up in skimpy clothes intended for teenage girls. I just wish she would accept who she is.

<comment><USER4> I'm going the other way. Coming from Java/Python and having studied C/C++ briefly, this looks like a huge improvement and something I would actually use for a production project. Hopefully in a few years time there will be more videos/books/tutorials that further explain how to use C++ in this way.

<comment><AUTHOR> I actually stopped working with C++ like 5 years ago. But after the new improvements I am also interested. I have been working so much on Java and C# projects that going back to the bare metal could be good.

Still I don't know if these changes came in too late. I don't imagine myself working in a full C++ project anymore. Lately I have been more interested in Erlang for performance and concurrency. I used to turn to C++ for that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I love seeing this. C++ is one of those things taken for granted because it's been there for so long, in a sort of love it or hate it way. Good to see all those C++0x changes are coming into shape and being implemented.

As much as I love newer technologies like python or JS, we still need things like C++ to get the cooler stuff running on metal. It's great to see improvements on this areas.</comment>


ITC judge says Samsung infringes key part of Apple patent - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/us-apple-samsung-patent-idUSBRE9340NI20130405 <comment><USER2> The patent system is ridiculous.</comment>


Microfluidics device helps diagnose sepsis in minutes - <AUTHOR> http://news.mit.edu/2019/biosensor-diagnose-sepsis-minutes-0723 <comment><USER2> That's huge. Sepsis kills so many people each year (something like 6m per year), and detected early it can be addressed.

For US stats, it's like 200,000 people dead per year from sepsis, and $24B expenditure to treat it. Absolutely massive.

[https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/pages/factsheet_sepsis.a...](https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/pages/factsheet_sepsis.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER3> IL6 is an inflammatory cytokine released due to a ton of stressors. Like fever, tachycardia, or tachypnea — this may be more a marker of sickness than sepsis.

Hopefully not, but let's see the trial first.

</comment><comment><USER4> It should take substantially less than 25 minutes to diagnosis sepsis by SIRS criteria (1). A standard clinical lab has been able to run a CBC that fast for decades and tell you how many of which white cells are present, hemoglobin, etc. Not sure what Il-6 is getting me...

(1) [https://www.mdcalc.com/sirs-sepsis-septic-shock- criteria](https://www.mdcalc.com/sirs-sepsis-septic-shock-criteria)

<comment><USER5> This looks like it would fit onto something the size of a glucose test strip and probably cost as much to manufacture. Could be useful for triage when infrastructure is compromised or unavailable.

<comment><USER4> If you're diagnosing sepsis under conditions where you don't have a CBC analyzer, you're looking at something like Charity Hospital after Katrina or Fukushima after the tsunami, some remote place, or a space mission.

I'm all for microfluidics, don't get me wrong. But we need a library of chips on hand to make sense of the range of things that could be happening to someone. Sepsis is ... a big deal. Physician anywhere outside a major hospital sees sepsis and their single, overriding thought is "get this person to a big hospital, ASAP"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, could have used this last week... BTW, anyone have good papers on how long cognitive deficiencies after sepsis is supposed to last? Asking for a relative.

<comment><USER7> SAE is probably the best term to search for but it looks like recovery depends on the severity of the sepsis:

Sepsis Associated Encephalopathy: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4590973/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4590973/)

> _SAE should not be regarded as an acute reversible state and there may be > long term cognitive as well as radiological deficits in survivors of SAE. > The neurological outcome depends on the severity of sepsis: mild cases > likely recover completely, while survivors of severe sepsis may have long > term deficits. At present therapeutic choices are limited and are mainly > based on symptom control._

<comment><USER6> Thank you this was very helpful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Interesting to see (apparent) success on the type of promises that Theranos made.</comment>


Sweden reopens Wikileaks founder rape investigation - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11151277

<comment><USER2> The bad things about this case is that whatever happens to Mr Assange, or how he is perceived in the media and by the wider world, directly impacts the credibility of wikileaks itself (like it or not).

A site that is built on a great ideal can now be easily dismissed by doubters and opponents because of the actions of its figurehead.

The people behind wikileaks should have remained anonymous and not given their enemies a target to attempt to take down.

Instead, Mr Assange reveled in the attention and tempted opponents of wikileaks to make a case of him.

<comment><USER3> I think the fact that they were not anonymous tremendously helped the credibility of wikileaks.

That that backfires now is not a reason to say it was bad of them to do this in the first place.

Also, there is nobody guilty until they've been proven guilty.

If this is a smear job and it comes out as such in the longer term then wikileaks stature will only grow, if it isn't and Assange steps down I don't doubt that the next person to take his place will know that he/she is living in a glass box and needs to act accordingly.

wikileaks > Julian Assange.

<comment><USER2> It is a smear campaign, so they don't have to wait for a guilty or innocent verdict - the charges alone are doing enough damage.

I like the old wikileaks, before Julian starting getting his face on the news as being the spokesperson. Wikileaks is now editorialized, which makes it easy for the right to write it off as part of the liberal media. It all started with the 'collateral murder' video (the chosen title says a lot).

They should let the documents speak for themselves, and leave wikileaks to be the online de facto venue for such documents.

<comment><USER4> If, hypothetically, a rape had actually occurred (which we can't speak to at this time), could a genuine prosecution occur without accusations of a smear campaign? What if he really is a rapist? If that were the case, should he not be prosecuted because of the work he does with Wikileaks?

But I agree that Wikileaks has been editorializing too much. I liked it when they were acting as journalists, not activists.

<comment><USER2> Actually I didn't word what I wrote correctly, what I meant to say is that no matter what happens, some will see it as a smear campaign.

Sweden is country advanced enough that you would assume that they don't just charge people with rape without there being some evidence to support the charge. We can also assume that the legal system in that country is stable enough to grant Julian a fair trial and judge him based on the evidence.

To date his only defense has been that this is a deliberate attempt by unnamed powers-that-be to smear his name because of his role at wikileaks. I can't recall him directly addressing the allegations (a good lawyer would advise him to save it for the courtroom).

It is an interesting case because of who he is - it will also be interesting if he mounts a 'this is a false allegation because of who I am' defense in court.

<comment><USER3> > it will also be interesting if he mounts a 'this is a false allegation > because of who I am' defense in court.

It will be very short in that case.

The thing that makes this look like a smear job is the fact that it's two women that know each other at a _very_ convenient time combined with the fact that Assange had already gone public before the alleged rape had happened with the warning that 'dirty tricks' were in their future.

It all seems a bit too convenient. The way the Swedish authorities went about the case to date also doesn't smell like roses.

Time will tell. As for the Swedish legal system being pure, I recall that not that long ago there was a ruling in the Pirate Bay case that a judge that had substantial ties with the recording industry was deemed impartial enough to judge their case.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If there is sufficient evidence here then an investigation is right and proper. It's easy to see this as about Julian Assange but it's also about someone who claims that they've been raped - something which has to be taken seriously.

I don't see a particular issue with the original prosecutor being overruled by his seniors - in cases such as this I'd imagine that they want to make sure that they do everything they can make sure that they get it right and appear above reproach and if in doubt investigate it properly seems a sensible approach.

<comment><USER6> I agree. Rape is a serious crime, regardless of who, by whom or to whom. However, it would be difficult to say that the handling of this case has been proper. To the contrary, it seems like a complete mess.

The prosecutors seem to be playing a PR game very publicly. A proper investigation does not issue an arrest straight away, retreat the arrest, then issue an arrest again once the mood has calmed down.

<comment><USER7> reminds me of Prosecutor Ekström from the Millenium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Trilogy>)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I like Opplysningskontoret's (a Norwegian version of The Onion) summary:

 _The contents of Wikileaks-founder leaks into Swedish women._

<comment><USER9> Yes, nothing like rape for a good chuckle.

<comment><USER10> If wikileaks should be allowed to leak state secrets then why should some jokes be taboo?

<comment><USER9> No one said they weren't allowed to make the jokes.

<comment><USER11> It might just be my reading of it but _Yes, nothing like rape for a good chuckle._ conveys disapproval to me.

<comment><USER12> There's a tremendous difference between expressing disapproval for what someone says and believing that they shouldn't be allowed to say it (insert not-actually-Voltaire quote here).

<comment><USER13> _insert not-actually-Voltaire quote here_

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Done.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there a business case to be made for ClojureScript? - <AUTHOR>

I work primarily with Javascript (React client-side, Node server-side). I've enjoyed the brief time I've spent with Clojure/ClojureScript (as well as other functional languages like Elixir). However, the chance of my current workplace (or many future workplaces) adopting an esoteric language like Clojure/CLJS is very low without a strong business case.<p>Unfortunately, whenever I try to think of cases for ClojureScript that aren't handled acceptably by Javascript/CoffeeScript, I come up empty.  Can anyone on HN recommend any resources, or provide some concrete examples of CLJS value-adds that Javascript can't compete with? <comment><USER2> A strong business case is already having an existing piece of critical code that is implemented in CLJS. It's why Objective-C is still a thing.

So if you want to use it, just implement something with it and see what happens. There are two negative outcomes and one positive one:

\- you could get fired (in which case it's a pretty bad job that affords you no latitude)

\- you have to rewrite it in JS (you would have had to anyway, apparently)

\- or they'll say "Looks great, keep it running, maybe other people can try out this CLJS thing too."

As far as objective argument for the setup's superiority, there is none. Software has an embarrassment of riches with regard to capable tools; ClojureScript and JavaScript are both capable tools.

</comment><comment><USER3> Clojure/ClojureScript are fundamentally simpler (better) languages than Java/JavaScript respectively. Given idiomatic usage, the result in more concise, understandable code which allows greater flexibility of any product's road map. The ability to change and adapt (flexibility) is one of the most essential qualities a business organization should have.

There is your business case : )

</comment><comment><USER4> defmulti/defmethod is a much cleaner way of handling dispatch on the typical message buses you see in JS than anything js provides. This speeds development and lowers maintenance (the bulk of time spent in a typical business application).

core.async makes working with UIs much easier to reason about. It's a more robust solution to the space than promises.

If the page/app is standalone, cljs is often a considerable size savings thanks to the google closure compiler's optimizations than what is typical of a jquery (or similar page). This means less to download which can be a big deal on mobile (although if this is truly your problem, the solution might not actually be clojurescript as much as not using giant frameworks in general).

It's also fun for developers. Unhappy developers are developers that are one foot out the door.</comment>


SEC Proposes New Rules for General Solicitation of Private Securities - <AUTHOR> http://www.stansburylegal.com/2012/08/sec-proposes-new-rule-for-general-solicitation-of-private-securities/

<comment><USER2> So contrary to the scenario lots of people were worrying about (or salivating over), equity crowdfunding will still be restricted to accredited investors. I think this is a good thing. It won't completely prevent scams, I'm sure, but will help limit the damage they could do.

<comment><USER3> This proposed rule does not relate to the crowdfunding provision of the JOBS Act.

The SEC has still not made public any information about how they plan to amend their rules to implement the crowdfunding provision. But the act stipulates that in some circumstances investment will be open to the general public, not just accredited investors, so stay tuned.</comment></comment>


Apply HN: Morphic Footwear – Morphing Shoes: Fight, Flight, and Delight Modes - <AUTHOR> Batteries in sole supply power and charge overnight via mini usb
App for manual control, automatic controls as follows: Take fight stance for fight mode, start running for flight mode, take weight off soles for Delight Mode.
Calculates user traction and current terrain type in real time, deploying cleats when beneficial.
Fight Mode: Laces tighten, plates in shoe hardened via application of current.
Flight Mode: Laces tighten, plates relaxed by withdrawal of current.
Delight Mode: Laces loosen, plates relaxed.
*Other Modes
Work Mode(Office) Work Mode(Labor) Dance Mode <comment><USER2> Sounds very gimmicky. What have you done to validate the market for this product?

Also, what relevant design and manufacturing experience do you have?</comment>