Don't Call Yourself a Developer If You Don't Code - <AUTHOR> http://devwp.eu/dont-call-yourself-a-developer-if-you-dont-code/ <comment><USER2> I find it fascinating how obsessed people are with titles.

Edit: I code, but I honestly couldn't care less what someone else calls themselves. If I'm interviewing them, they'd have to prove their abilities in the relevant code right then.

If we're just having a conversation, most disciplines are different enough that you have to explain many things from the bottom up anyway.

Backend developers lead entirely different lives from frontend developers, and both lead entirely different lives from low level developers. Game developers or data science devs similarly work nothing like anyone else. So why does it matter that someone calls themselves a Wordpress Developer?

<comment><USER3> Since it sounds like "Wordpress developer" is a title used to refer to people who add wordpress plugins, I wonder what you would call actual developers working on Wordpress core engine.

<comment><USER4> Well, that somehow reminds me of one hilarious subtitle:

        Tim Berners-Lee
        Web Developer

<comment><USER5> I remember seeing that subtitle somewhere... :)

Tim Berners-Lee, Web Developer

David Shing, AOL Digital Prophet

[https://mobile.twitter.com/ElSatanico/status/514340801468706...](https://mobile.twitter.com/ElSatanico/status/514340801468706816/photo/1)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If someone is able to build with a tool something that a developer would build with code, they are practically a developer (especially if the market starts to identify them as such). Your hiring needs and classic dictionary definitions notwithstanding. Could it be that programming is being commoditized and we don't want to accept it?

<comment><USER7> The OP's sentiment runs the risk of alienating people who would potentially be interested in pursuing a more "traditional" software engineering or development career. I am not sure that is ultimately a good thing.

I guess as a technical community, there are at least two forces at work here: 1) The community wants to be as inclusive as possible - get as many people to code as possible, because it is good for everyone to be able to contribute, even if it is using a higher-level tool/abstraction that does much of what we would do writing code by hand manually; and/or 2) The community wants to distinguish itself clearly based on skill-level at some level of core competency or abstraction.

<comment><USER7> One more thought - I am not sure we want to go down this route, but organizing into professional trade organizations (I hesitate to call it a union) could provide for "licensed/certified" software engineers/etc. to help distinguish.

I know we have plenty of professional certifications, but I don't know of one as general as this which exists yet and has any true merit. I think the IEEE was working on something like this.

<comment><USER8> I really appreciate your train of thought on this subject, because I can tell you've got a pragmatic, inclusive desire in mind. Hopefully my little bit on guitarists/guitar players in this thread kind of aligns. I just wanted to respond because in guitar, there are top 1% players. Chet Atkins was one of the undisputed greats, and he used to bestow upon people the term "Certified Guitar Player" to convey his approval and admiration. If you'd like to see what he meant, feel free to check out some live work by Tommy Emmanuel, a CGP according to Chet. Since Chet has passed away, I don't think anybody feels it's their role to take his place giving people the term, but it remains a very highly regarded professional distinction!

<comment><USER7> I think what you said both here and in your post are very valuable additions indeed.

To me what it feels like you're saying is - when you are truly an "expert", it is more likely that you can identify/recognize other "experts" \- or even people with that potential.

When I look at my own skills, I try to rate myself honestly on the following scale with regards to some particular skill: expert, professional or amateur.

Expert is a guru-level understanding. If I say that I am an expert, I am saying I think I am as good as the top x% (where x is maybe 1-10) in a particular skill. For me, I pretty much never rate myself as this in any skill!

Professional is practiced, practical, hands-on real world skill. You've honed this skill, you've been formally trained, you've employed this skill successfully in a repeated, demonstrated way.

Amateur is a hobby, done it a few times, do it for fun or would like to do it/get better at it level of experience.

I observed that in traditional skilled tradesmanship, we have the apprentice, who progresses to the journeyman, who progresses to the master craftsman. These are the same levels of what I mean by amateur, professional and expert.

I don't know why our industry seems to reject some of these concepts from skilled trades in terms of organizing into better/stronger professional trade organizations and certifications.

Actually, the way we often talk about coding as a "craft", it's almost like we would feel a lot better with a formal organization and such a career progression/structure in place.

We have our 1%'ers in the software community, our gurus/experts/master craftsman. I often think of these as the core contributing past and current "fathers" and "mothers" of our industry, people ranging anywhere from Ada Lovelace to Vint Cerf. Reality is, those core thinkers are probably where many of us learn from anyway - that and "hacking/tinkering" which is what many of us do and can still lead to progress too.

To me it's all connected, but something about our community always holds us back... maybe there it is the element of not wanting to be forced into structure either. After all, the "hacker" ethos is also a source of our strength, and part of the art.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Don't call yourself developer if you don't know C"

"Don't call yourself developer if you know only one programming language"

"Don't call yourself developer if you don't know (put any algorithm here)"

"Don't call yourself developer if you don't (have this one particualr skill that I have)"

Nothing changed.

<comment><USER10> "Don't call yourself an engineer (e.g. software engineer) if you got a CS degree."

<comment><USER11> In Canada, it's actually illegal to do so.

<comment><USER12> I don't think this is actually true, e.g.: [http://www30.rhdcc.gc.ca/CNP/English/NOC/2006/Profile.aspx?v...](http://www30.rhdcc.gc.ca/CNP/English/NOC/2006/Profile.aspx?val=0&val1=2173)

You can't call yourself a "professional engineer" unless you are one but if you have a CS degree you can actually become a "professional software engineer" if you go through the process, pass all the tests and meet all the requirements.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Oh I feel bad for laughing at this post, because yeah, the term "developer" genuinely infers a distinction worth pointing out. Words do matter, and using terms improperly cheapen the meaning. This is important in the realm of commerce.

Why do I laugh? Welcome to the world of "guitarists." Sure, some people have spent 1-3 years learning the instrument, as a general concept, and they can play the open chords, the barre chords, and maybe even know 10+ cover songs. Great! They can play guitar, but are they a guitarist?

Not really, because these same people don't really know how things work "under the hood" when it comes to the instrument. There's a laundry list of techniques, genres, ancillary skills and more which in layman's terms equates to a genuine "guitarist." It's a very broad label that can be used appropriately, or, like the article says, be employed by over-confident amateurs.

There's nothing wrong with being a "guitar player" and having fun with the instrument, and if those guys and gals want to join a cover band or do Open Mic night performances to improve their craft, awesome. Enjoy it. In my experience though, "guitar player" folks quickly check their ego when a tried and true "guitarist" starts playing in front of a crowd. There's usually a communal appreciation, in that a guitarist won't talk down to guitar players because there's a shared love of the instrument, of the purpose, and an appreciation for a mutual desire to make music...and every once and a while, there's a heckler or arrogant ass who can't stand the ego check.

That's why in guitar-land we have "head cutting" \- the one vs. one, get up on stage, "put up or shut up" mentality for bragging rights. Some people who inappropriately call themselves developers should be easy to call out in this fashion. Those who deserve the term will treat it with respect, and act accordingly.

YMMV!

</comment><comment><USER13> I can relate to this. A few years ago, as a young student that have invested time to learn PHP, MySQL and the inner workings of WordPress Themes and Plugins I found that people who didn't even know HTML where filling the local freelance market with prices I can't beat.

I ended-up offering higher prices for custom solutions (that took me more and more time) finally it reached the point where the highest price I could ask for (as a 20y/o student) wasn't worth the time invested in each project, and I quit freelancing.

<comment><USER14> I have a few reasonably popular Wordpress plugin, maybe around 500k installs. I get offers all the time from people wanting me to build them something for $25.

If you use Wordpress to find clients, it's tough to find good paying work. But if you find clients elsewhere, then you can use Wordpress as a part of your overall solution and save time.

<comment><USER13> These "WordPress admins" are just giving the rest of us a bad name. Last time I tried to convince a client that a WordPress would suit their needs just fine with a custom theme that I'll write, they first disagreed and wanted some framework then tried to cut the budget in half (just for mentioning WordPress)

<comment><USER15> most _capable_ people selling WordPress nowadays don't sell WordPress itself, but a solution, purely because of the bad rap and the "WordPress developers" out there. I personally don't feel comfortable being "ashamed" of what I work because of the fact that 9 out of 10 people out on the street sell WordPress websites and claim that they are developers.

And I don't see a reason to switch to a more elitist community just to avoid the ones who've intruded or don't know better due to the lack of educational resources and standards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I don't think the titles we use are irrelevant like some have said, but why draw the line at the manual editing of text that is ultimately translated into machine language? Do programmers working at a lower level of abstraction have a stronger claim to the title of "developer"?

I've never used WordPress, but to my knowledge this is just a tool that reduces the amount of manual coding involved in creating a website. To me this seems similar to the way Python reduces the amount of C you have to write, which reduces the amount of assembly you have to write, and so on to the machine code. Perhaps WordPress "development" is considered easier, but even if you equate the terms "developer" and "software developer," it doesn't seem like an unambiguously inaccurate or misleading description of the activity.

<comment><USER17> With WP I think it's a problem when people sell others pre-existing plugins and themes as their own work. I think a self proclaimed WP developer should at least know all there is to know about Theme development. That means they need to know all the wordpress internals as it relates to themes, hooks, filters, theme templates, custom post types, basic php logic, html, css, standards etc... They don't need to know plugin development, as plugins can contain so much and be basically anything, but by the time they know most of the theme aspects, they would be able to make basic plugins anyways. The problem is a lot of people don't even know those things, since pre-made plugins and themes make it easier to set up

<comment><USER16> Incorporating themes and plugins strikes me as basically equivalent to using a framework written by a third party in your software product, which few would say disqualifies you as a "developer," even if you couldn't write framework components yourself. I'm not making claims about the amount of expertise required to be a WordPress developer, only whether the title could be appropriate for a person who cannot "write code."

<comment><USER15> I believe that what walod refers to is the astounding number of people calling themselves "developers" while installing vanilla WordPress with a few plugins and a theme, and changing a few admin options. There's certainly nothing wrong in using WordPress as a framework (which many of us do to cut down time wasted on building CRUD and ACL and DB layers etc), it's just that now everyone is suddenly a WordPress developer once they know how to install WordPress from the web host's admin panel.

<comment><USER16> Yes, I understand. My main message is that it seems a software developer need not be a programmer in the sense of writing code as we currently conceptualize it. It isn't hard to imagine a future where ordinary people can create their own software using primarily visual tools, as I presume WordPress developers do.

I'm also obliquely objecting to the lionization of software developers in general, as much software development is glorified plumbing, while some of it is among the most intellectually challenging work available. If one is going to take pride in one's job, I tend to think it should result from the work itself, rather than the job title.

<comment><USER15> I don't mind the job being done by people building products with visual tools. I just believe that the "developer" title has a unified and consistent meaning across different platforms, languages, communities and what not, and new types of services (like composing elements with visual builders) need a new title to avoid ambiguity - say, site builders, webmasters, implementers, super admins or so forth.

That would be more than sufficient - creating a new job group for people with similar skills and service offerings, allowing SMB clients to reach out to those and large businesses connecting with developers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Reminds me of the hackathons where "BizDev's" show up and expect to find someone to create their app.

<comment><USER19> Yeah, exactly. "It just needs implementation. I'm an idea man."

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkGMY63FF3Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkGMY63FF3Q)

<comment><USER20> [http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/SMOP.html](http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/SMOP.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'd like to more about why 'WordPress Developers' are such a magnet for the author's ire.

The last paragraph was pretty weak. The bald assertion that "Installing a website itself is of no service to most clients who can accomplish the same in a couple of hours with a cheap host providing a detailed guide on their website", must be false. At least two hours of technically knowledgeable work is definitely a worthwhile service, and deserves adequate remuneration. The next sentence, about "providing real value" doesn't stand up, then, because such WordPress Devs _are_ providing real value.

There's no reason why success should require taking on custom projects for larger businesses, when there is an ample market of small businesses and new businesses that are well-served with just WordPress and plugins.

</comment><comment><USER22> Those who title-inflate do so at their own peril; doing so selects for employers that have poor ability to hire competent people.

</comment><comment><USER23> But how am I going to convey the fact that I'm an evil person planning on destroying your community to replace it with McMansions and Big Box stores?

<comment><USER24> So this is what Steve Ballmer meant all along

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> To people who are not involved with web development in any way, they just don't care whether someone writes code for a living, or admins a site via a CMS like Wordpress. To most of the world, both types of people "make web sites".

Trying to claim a specific title for yourself, while telling other people that they have no right to claim that same title, is purely an exercise in your own ego.

<comment><USER26> And the author mentioned how it has negative consequences when there is in fact an actual difference that the clients are not able to distinguish between. Some self-policing on the part of the people who can would help a lot with that.

<comment><USER25> Are you referring to that bulleted list of problems that he claims impact the "entire industry"?

Because that list sounded more like negative consequences to the author's business, not an entire industry. If he were truly succeeding as a services company focused on the Wordpress niche, those would be pain points toward which he would focus his own marketing, and they would be business opportunities, not global problems with people's titles.

<comment><USER15> Other than the bulleted list I linked a few articles as well, including the problem with having to educate the customers. While education is always required, most of the "developers" underprice the market, sell unstable solutions and so on. A lot of enterprise customers avoid WordPress as being unreliable and hard to find a reliable team for, which leads to other problems.

We do have a decent business strategy that seems to be working and have some high-end clients (including banks, automotive manufacturers, SaaS providers), but our growth is somewhat constrained due to the limited opportunities thanks to the bad rap of the platform, hiring is incredibly challenging, selling to enterprises has an added overhead and so on. And yes, we can switch to another platform, but I do believe that a few actionable steps (like settings standards and simply separating site builders from developers) can solve many of those problems.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Another episode of the title wars.

"You can't call yourself an engineer when you don't have a degree from an engineering school", "You are not an architect if you didn't study architecture in college" blah blah blah

Can we please put these debates to rest? it's tiring already. Yeah, recruitment is frustrating since everyone likes to over inflate or lie outright about the accomplishments and qualifications on their CV but it's been established a long time ago that this is part of the process and the onus is on the interviewer or recruiter to screen the applicants and tell who's the real deal and who's not, it's part of their job after all.

<comment><USER28> Title inflation lowers the perceived value of professional development work. It goes from "I don't understand what you're doing, but it looks hard" to "My ten year old nephew set up a WordPress site, so why should I pay you $150k a year to build the CRUD backend for my brilliant startup idea?"

All professions that don't have gatekeepers, certification, and strong professional associations suffer from declining salaries.

The difference between good and bad web dev is the difference between a site that scales, is maintainable, secure, and reliable, and looks nice, as opposed to a WP site that does none of the above. (But looks nice - maybe.)

I've talked to "designers" who say things like "I don't know if we can do that - I leave all those details to my technical people."

It turns out all the "designer" did was pick a font and a colour scheme and draw a few wireframes. And they got the job because they knew someone on the board.

Meanwhile the "technical people" have done all the real work - and could probably make a site look just as good if they'd been asked to.

<comment><USER15> Agreed with all of the above. I'm even surprised that more of the "hardcore devs" didn't get annoyed by WordPress crossing the 25% web market share a week ago. I can see how more and more large businesses turn to WordPress to cut license costs, decrease salaries, reduce development time and invest more in marketing/advertisement instead.

That comment is also for everyone who mentioned that the post reflects only to the state of a single business instead of an entire community, ecosystem and the business of web development as a whole.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm surprised how many commenters here argue that those who care about the meaning associated with the word developer are somehow obsessed with titles. Titles are useful (especially fairly generic titles like software developer) and serve to convey meaning among the multitude of disciplines we have in the industry.

If you've never written code, why call yourself a developer? I know language changes over time, but that's just being purposefully misleading.

<comment><USER15> Precisely. I wouldn't care if it was 0.01% of the "developers" in WordPress. But when it's the vast majority, actual developers become a limited and hardly visible minority.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Actually, calling yourself "Wordpress developer" already tells me, that you cannot implement software beyond a certain level (aka real software), so I am okay with that. There are already so many _PHP developers_ , who cannot do that and _Wordpress developer_ seems to be one step beneath that.

Just to clearify: There are totally legit developers who use Wordpress and/or PHP, but they usually would not put that in their title.

</comment><comment><USER31> This is a good article.

However, I'm having trouble understanding on what's it doing on top of HN. Are there actually a lot of people who have regular encounters with WP developers, or WP at all, aside from may be people from the WP company itself, that read or comment here? I had such a good impression of a crowd here that I assumed that working with WP requires far less programming skills that people here usually have.

</comment><comment><USER32> This is a context thing. As OP depicts, in this context developer means someone who codes. A WordPress "developer" may call herself a "developer" just fine in the right context, but when used in places where the OP is coming from, the word does not contain the expected information.

<comment><USER33> It does seem that Europeans outwith the UK seem to be much more hierarchical and hung up on titles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> >Mario Peshev is a CEO and WordPress Architect at DevriX, a technical WordPress development agency building scalable projects for successful businesses.

Don't call yourself an architect if you don't plan, design, and construct buildings.

That would be absurd of me to expect, clearly the meaning of the word "architect" has different meaning in different contexts, to different people, and in different fields of work. "Engineer" is another good example. If you have specific definitions, use them in your job postings so people know what you mean, but don't cry foul when people use a term in an accepted but different manner than you prefer.

<comment><USER15> I get your point and I'd genuinely apologize to every architect graduate (in the construction space) who feels insulted by that.

Even if my day-to-day follows the "software architect" definition, I would gladly replace it with something closer to the technical field if it wasn't polluted by the majority of people mislabeling themselves. Which is more or less the point of the post.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> On the bright side, calling themselves "engineers" only creates even more drama, so given that extremely likely alternative, "developer" is the less evil.

Some of it comes from various state / federal labor law and relates to compensation. Someone who, lets face it, is the online equivalent of a sign spinner, has certain legal obligations WRT overtime compensation that isn't an issue for a "professional engineer" or "software developer"... A lot of overtime pay is saved by calling data entry clerks "developers".

</comment><comment><USER36> The author would have a point if these people were calling themselves "software developers". Using the definition of a "software developer" to object to people calling themselves "wordpress developers" shows a narrow understanding of the word 'developer'. A developer, in fact, is someone who develops something.

</comment><comment><USER37> I'm a senior something developer something something.

That's what most people hear when I try and use my title.

I simply tell people I program computers. Why? Because its what I do.

Does it matter to me that I'm not telling them that I design/architect and develop solutions? Nope. I don't care. Because, to me, that all boils down to "I program computers".

</comment><comment><USER38> My neighbor is a person who develops property. He's a property developer. A developer doesn't have to write code, they have to "grow or cause to grow and become more mature, advanced, or elaborate". I think a wordpress developer does just that.

<comment><USER39> Yeah, it's really bizarre to get hung up on such a vague term. Don't appropriate a generic word, give it a specific meaning, then complain when other people don't comply.

If you want a word for people who write computer programs, there's a word that means specifically that: "programmer."

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I tell my clients: would you use an 18 wheeler to move one small box from A to B?

Not only WP devs are not devs, they do not truly understand/care about real client needs. In than sense, the are not solution architects/designer either.

</comment><comment><USER41> title is only important if recognized by a client. Clients have no clue of underlying technology for the website or application they need, in most cases. But they often know 'WordPress' or 'Drupal'. You want a client? You have to call yourself 'WordPress Developer'. Never seen a client for website or application, who wanted to be aware of C++ or assembly skills of potential contractor.

<comment><USER42> > Never seen a client for website or application, who wanted to be aware of > C++ or assembly skills of potential contractor

No, but I would expect a Word Press Developer to know PHP, HTML and CSS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Don't Call Yourself an Architect If You Don't Code

</comment><comment><USER44> I'm proud to call myself a nogrammer. I'd much rather use/modify existing code than write from scratch.

</comment><comment><USER45> Simple filter rule. If the resume doesn't have the work "hacker" then throw it away.

</comment><comment><USER46> Property developers would be puzzled by this suggestion.

</comment><comment><USER47> First comment on that post is from a PHP "developer".</comment>


Damn Cool Algoritms: BK-Trees - <AUTHOR> http://blog.notdot.net/2007/4/Damn-Cool-Algorithms-Part-1-BK-Trees

<comment><USER2> Cool idea.

Both the article and other sites (<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2230> is an example) suggest that 3-20x performance improvements are typical.

I've worked on this problem before, and it seems like there are also simpler (and less memory intensive) ways of speeding up the computation. For example you can use properties like string lengths (or character distributions within strings) to get results that are just as good if not better. If you have a corpus of 1 million strings and you want to find all strings within an edit distance of 2 to a query, you can automatically eliminate any strings among the corpus whose length differs by > 2 from the length of the query string. Also, if you are willing to store 1-2 bytes of metadata about each string, you can use that metadata to very quickly generate lower bounds on edit distances, avoiding the O(N^2) distance computation whenever the lower bound is greater than your max tolerable distance. A good example of metadata would be to store (for each string in the corpus) the number of characters with ascii codes that are 0 mod 5, 1 mod 5, ... 4 mod 5.

<comment><USER3> What information about 'character distributions within strings' would be useful?

the idea of Levenshtein Distance as constituting a metric space is something i've never thought of. I implemented a simple "Did You Mean?" using L.D. in Ruby/C but didn't build this type of structure and now that i've read this it seems obvious.

edit: clarification

<comment><USER2> Let's say you plan to keep 2 bytes/16 bits of metadata for each string in the corpus. You can use these 16 bits to store five 3-bit counters for the number of characters in a string whose ascii values are 0, 1, ... 4 mod 5. Each counter can go up to 7 (0x111), at which point further increments are no-ops (so a string with 7 characters that have an ascii value of 0 mod 5 will have the same value in the first counter as a string with 20 characters that have an ascii value of 0 mod 5).

When you want to see if the Levenshtein distance between two strings is less than some threshold (say 2), you first compare the two sets of 5 counters. The difference in values for corresponding counters can help you determine a lower bound on the Levenshtein distance. For example, if the first string has six characters that are 1 mod 5, and the second string has 2 characters that are 1 mod 5, then your edit distance will be at least 2, so if you were only looking for strings that are within a distance of 1, you no longer need to bother computing Levenshtein for your two strings. Comparing counters is just a few bit operations, so it's super fast.

<comment><USER4> That reminds me of the Boyer-Moore string search algorithm. One way to implement B-M is with a bitmap of the characters in the query string, so that regions of the search space that can't possibly match the query will be skipped efficiently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The quick-select algorithm is a really simple and effective way of selecting the k-th smallest element and one that would be nice to cover. It's especially useful in situations where you need O(n) selection of the median element.

<comment><USER6> Yes. And you can unify quick-select and tree-sort (i.e. quicksort, but not in- place) in a lazy language easily in the same algorithm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Quad trees would be a cool algorithm to cover.

<comment><USER8> There is one that includes quad trees.

[http://blog.notdot.net/2009/11/Damn-Cool-Algorithms- Spatial-...](http://blog.notdot.net/2009/11/Damn-Cool-Algorithms-Spatial- indexing-with-Quadtrees-and-Hilbert-Curves)

I haven't read it yet though.

<comment><USER7> Nice, thanks.

I'll have to look around the site a bit more.</comment></comment></comment>


WordPressiOS Locked by App Store - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/photomatt/status/1296879217297113088 <comment><USER3> Tweet thread - it looks like Apple is requiring in-app purchases to sign-up for wordpress.com accounts, despite it being an open-source app for _any_ WordPress site:

> Heads up on why @WordPressiOS updates have been absent... we were locked by > App Store. To be able to ship updates and bug fixes again we had to commit > to support in-app purchases for .com plans. I know why this is problematic, > open to suggestions. Allow others IAP? New name?

> New name: The app has always done a ton of work to support WordPresses > hosted anywhere, using the XML-RPC API included in core WP since WP 2.6 was > released in 2008. That's why we called it "WordPress" and not > "[http://WordPress.com"](http://WordPress.com") or "Jetpack."

> I am a big believer in the sanctity of licenses. (Open source relies on > licenses and copyright.) We agreed to this license when we signed up for > (and stayed in) the app store, so going to follow and abide by the rules. > Not looking to skirt it, hence doing what they asked us to.

Alternate stories (though none are really that great):

MacRumors article that gives a (very) small background on this: [https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/21/wordpress-ios-app- apple...](https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/21/wordpress-ios-app-apple- blocked-updates/)

The Verge, with slightly more context: [https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21396316/apple- wordpress-...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21396316/apple-wordpress-in- app-purchase-tax-update-store)

EDIT: Apple stated in the past that app updates would _not_ be held up over guideline disputes.

[https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new- dev...](https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new-developer- technologies-to-foster-the-next-generation-of-apps/)

"Second, for apps that are already on the App Store, bug fixes will no longer be delayed over guideline violations except for those related to legal issues. Developers will instead be able to address the issue in their next submission. "

<comment><USER4> This is really sad. On the one hand, sure Apple should be able to make a cut on their app store, on the other hand, they shouldn't be allowed to force apps to do this sort of thing. This will only drive domain prices higher on iOS in order to compensate (in the case of Automattic). If I were in a position where Apple is forcing me to pay a 30% tax, I would literally add "30% Apple Tax" to the check out screen on top of the regular fees to make consumers aware. Course I'm sure Apple wouldn't like this at all either.

<comment><USER5> > If I were in a position where Apple is forcing me to pay a 30% tax, I would > literally add "30% Apple Tax" to the check out screen on top of the regular > fees to make consumers aware

If you don't know that, it is not allowed to sell for more in iOS than in your site, and the app will get banned for attempting that, forget about displaying 30% apple tax to the users explicitly.

Edit: Heard from somewhere, likely not fully correct.

<comment><USER6> Twitch charges $5.99 for a subscription to a streamer in their app but $5 on their website. Are they breaking this rule too? How are they getting away with it?

<comment><USER7> Are the subscriptions portable between the web and mobile apps? Or only valid one place or the other?

<comment><USER6> It's account-based, a sub on one transfers transparently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I know I really don't matter to Apple, but this walled garden and app store dictatorship is what finally made me move away from iOS to Android last year. I had used Android in the past, but it was with Samsung Galaxy's which where very bloated and awful when compared to Apple.

But when a friend told me that Samsung just ruin Android [1] and I should try an actual Google phone, I bought a Pixel and it's honestly great.

I can install apps I build myself very easily without Google's input at all, although I don't even need to build apps since their PWA's can do almost anything I'd want.

I highly recommend people who are sick of this Apple crap, to try a Google Pixel. I haven't even needed to sign up for a Google account since using it (although I have to use an alternative app store).

I've already moved three family members over and after a few days they basically don't notice a different.

Between moving to my Pixel and a Purism laptop I'm pretty much free from Apple, apart from my work laptop, which isn't my choice.

1\. Disclaimer! I am very privacy, open-source, freedom orientated so if you don't mind a bunch of binary blobs that track you maybe Samsung would work for you.

<comment><USER9> > I am very privacy, open-source, freedom orientated

I like to think I am as well. How do you balance this when moving from Apple to Android, where Apple (seems) to be much more privacy-focused and basically at zero for open-source/freedom, where Android is basically the reverse? I think there are ways to make it better (custom ROM, alternative app stores), but you give up a lot of functionality (Play Store, Google Pay, etc.), and I'm not sure you can entirely eliminate all concerns.

I like the freedom of Android, so as long as I understand what I'm giving up privacy-wise I don't mind the trade-off. I have at least tried to make it a little harder for Google, using DuckDuckGo, but I'm guessing it only makes a dent with the other massive amounts of data they can still glean from the various services running on the phone, Gmail, Maps, etc.

<comment><USER10> You can use stock Android without a Google account. You can avoid the Google Play Store, disable most google default provided apps, and sideload apps of your choosing. You can use a browser (such as Firefox) that the phone vendor has no control over. You can even install an alternate app store. This sounds like what the parent is doing, and it's the best mainstream experience for anybody looking for a privacy and security oriented mobile device (while still actually having control of their own device).

With a Pixel phone, you can go further, unlock the bootloader and install a third party OS that does not even include Google services installed at all.

Of course, on the other hand, you could sign up for every google service, load all their apps, and consent to all their tracking, in which case you give away everything. Google makes it very easy to do this.

But either way, it's at least your choice. Unlike Apple, which thinks it certainly knows best what code should be allowed on your computer and how it should be placed there.

<comment><USER11> Doesn't GPS on android use Google Play Services for location? In many apps, I'm asked to turn on Google's location services if I have them off. Would that not automatically send data to Google, even if you aren't logged in?

<comment><USER12> That's because those apps use google play location services, not because GPS on android in itself requires it. If you download apps from FDroid most won't use or require google play location services.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> From the replies (@mysl_co):

> Hey Matt, When I open the Help Center from the app, I can get guidance about > upgrading to one of your paid plans. If I tap on "Plans" as seen the > screenshot, the app opens Safari and shows the plans. This is a violation > according to App Store Review Guidelines.

> Here is the relevant term that your app violated: 3.1.3(a) Apps may allow a > user to access previously purchased content or content subscriptions […] > provided that you agree not to directly or indirectly target iOS users to > use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase

This is amazing to me. They're essentially taxing _hyperlinks_ in your app? The "directly or indirectly target iOS users" wording seems like it would even cover a mere textual mention of a paid product in the app.

The read anti-trust magnifying glass should be on Apple's lack of support for the PWA-related standards. Google's FUGU program is closing the gap quite fast, and Apple (thanks to their ban on other browser engines) knows they can hold back the tide by dragging their feet on development of the standards. Their strategy is so anti-competitive, and so out in the open that I can't see how they've been allowed to get away with it for so long.

<comment><USER14> Ah this is it right here. I had been very confused as to why Apple made this move. This is at least consistent with their past actions.

But yeah the lack of ability to link to web based payment for subscription plans _or even mention it_ will probably be something that has to go from the app store's terms. It's bad for both users and developers. The situation is confusing for users. Not all apps have margins that can support 30%, but this policy makes it non obvious how to even subscribe.

I think if Apple had a flat 15% for subscriptions they'd still get a fair bit of usage, as there are big conversion advantages to using the IAP system. They might even get more revenue by attracting dev's with reasonable terms, growing the amount of subscription apps using.

This seems much more clear cut to me than Epic's demands. Epic wants to dismantle the whole phone system as we know it.

<comment><USER15> > I think if Apple had a flat 15% for subscriptions they'd still get a fair > bit of usage, as there are big conversion advantages to using the IAP > system. They might even get more revenue by attracting dev's with reasonable > terms, growing the amount of subscription apps using.

As a personal aside, the 15% rate is a bit odd in the App Store, as someone loses money on my subscriptions there. My personal App Store account is funded heavily by gift cards bought at 15-20% off, and I strongly suspect based on deals I've seen over the years that merchants have historically gotten a 15% cut on gift cards sold.

I also have been trying to figure out whether this has changed recently, as Apple has consolidated their "App Store" gift card with the retail "Apple Store" gift card - the same gift card can be used for movies, subscriptions, or toward new headphones. Coinciding with this, all of my channels for purchasing gift cards at discounted rates removed their card displays.

This could very well be part of a coordinated effort to reduce the average cost of IAP to be capable of offering a lower rate around in-app purchases. It could also be Apple realizing they are now giving up significant profit on people applying these gift cards toward Apple-run services, like Apple Music or Arcade.

<comment><USER14> Oh right I forgot about that. People ignore this with the 15%-30%: Apple has done a lot of work to get money into the app store ecosystem. The larger margin allowed them to spread this sort of currency.

They can make a different solution, but it may not be better for the app ecosystem. Those gift cards got a lot of people into buying apps. I personally started when I got a $100 itunes gift card while buying a laptop as a student.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I've commented this elsewhere, but Apple encouraging users to only upgrade and purchase subscriptions through Apple's payment systems and hiding in-app alternatives and links to other options isn't just about the 30% fee. It also increases consumer lock-in to the Apple ecosystem.

If the only thing you're using your phone for is calling, browsing, and buying apps, it's not _that_ hard to switch to Android. You lose all of your apps, and that stinks a lot, but if most of your apps are free you might tolerate that. And outside of the apps, you can keep your phone number, export your contacts, etc...

But if suddenly all of your phone subscriptions including newspapers, music services like Spotify, hosts like Wordpress, email services like Hey, and so on -- if all of those are only managed through your phone and can't be canceled or upgraded by the companies themselves then that's another big annoyance to deal with that might keep you from switching just because you want an Android app that isn't available for your phone.

Apple tries very hard to lock users into its ecosystem. That's why there's a credit card now that only works with Apple phones; it's to make sure that if you ever change phones, you now have to deal with canceling a credit card. That's why companies aren't allowed to build their own interoppable solutions around iMessage. It's to make sure that if you change phones, you get social stigma from your friends and have a worse SMS experience with them.

The payments rules are another part of that. Yes, of course Apple wants the 30%, but they also want literally everything you do on your phone to be tied to them. If Apple could create a world where you lost your phone number when you switched phones, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

They want their walled garden to have a one-way door.

<comment><USER17> > _it 's not that hard to switch to Android._

As long as you don't care about privacy, updates and having everything you do tied to Google.

<comment><USER16> If you're worried about tying all of your stuff to a giant amoral company, then your only realistic option right now is a stock Android phone with a de- Googled Lineage OS ROM, using the F-Droid store for software.

The efforts on making decent Linux phones are really important here and worth supporting, but still a long way away from being usable.

A legislative effort to partially debundle hardware from the exclusive control of a single company could be very helpful in mitigating the situation you describe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Here, I think that we can clap for all the "Apple products" fanboys that have led us to this new world where a lot of people are thinking that it is normal that 2 companies have the arbitrary and dictatorial right to decide what is allowed to run on an user device just because they sold it...

Imagine, a car manufacturer that would remotely block cars for using highways that they don't like or have not paid the "tribute" to them.

Or, the gouvernement of one of the few remaining real democracies that will arbitrary dictate everything that you can or cannot do, based on arbitrary decisions depending of their personal preferences or financial interests.

</comment><comment><USER19> It's quite amazing how hard Apple is pushing this now with all of the extra regulatory eyes on the subject. I guess they're fairly confident that they're untouchable.

<comment><USER20> It might be more because Epic is forcing their hand. Up to this point, Apple either just nudged smaller players or secretly negotiated deals with larger ones. With Epic shining a light on this, Apple has to more blatantly enforce this across the board. Now, in a legal setting, Epic can't point out how inconsistent Apple is with this policy.

<comment><USER21> > Now, in a legal setting, Epic can't point out how inconsistent Apple is with > this policy.

Well, except they can point at Amazon, who only pays a 15% cut: [https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/20/21378156/apple-news- publi...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/20/21378156/apple-news-publishers- subscription-deal-app-store-cut-terms-amazon-letter)

<comment><USER15> For what it is worth, Apple _does_ have this arrangement with at least one other company. It is however a partnership deal with extremely specific terms: \- The app must be a video subscription app (which can also provide purchases and rentals) \- You must support iOS, iPadOS, and tvOS versions of the app \- You must integrate into the Apple TV app and into Siri search and playback APIs \- You must allow the user to subscribe through Apple, which will result in a 15% cut of the subscription fee (in this case, Apple gets 15% of the cost of Amazon Prime) \- Additional purchases made against an apple-backed subscription must be in-app purchases, of which Apple gets a 15% cut (so renting a recent movie or subscribing to Showtime would result in a 15% revenue cut) \- (AFAICT) Purchases/subscriptions/rentals against an account with existing billing information are not subject to any Apple revenue share \- (AFAICT) Account management such as configuring or troubleshooting payment options for externally subscribed accounts must be outside of the app.

I imagine Amazon suspects that they have enough people who have already purchased prime that the in-app purchase usage won't be a significant revenue drain - and I imagine that Apple has a contract with terms specifically to prevent Amazon "pulling an Epic" should it turn out that their assumption of subscription percentages be wrong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've been thinking lately that Open Source, much less FOSS, needs to separate itself from corporate entities entirely. I've seen FOSS/OS communities use proprietary technologies like Slack over Mattermost or IRC, GitHub over GitLab or Gitea, and even as deep as prioritizing native apps over PWA architecture that could've achieved the same things.

I doubt Apple's ignorance over the economics of the matter or how it relates to community relations will become apparent to them, but I think this is a beacon in the night to developers everywhere. Money driven companies will never be more than a tool, much less your friends.

<comment><USER23> Using open source tooling? Yes that makes sense and should carry some weight for an open source project.

Abandoning real client apps and instead telling everyone to use a webpage has nothing to do with software licensing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Apple seems to be trying to make it as difficult as possible to distribute an iOS app that doesn't result in money moving into Apple's pocket, even when it makes absolutely no sense to enable that... unless you're Amazon, in which case your otherwise unauthorizedly thin margins are suddenly perfectly acceptable.

</comment><comment><USER25> They're lucky that Apple hasn't yet realized their app is GPLv2. They're going to end up purged from the app store altogether unless they relicense their codebase, no matter what they end up deciding to do with IAP.

<comment><USER5> What's the problem with GPLv2 licensed app?

<comment><USER24> The App Store TOS specifically prohibits you from redistributing any app you download from it. GPLv2 specifically prohibits that, so any distribution of an app under GPLv2 terms is a license violation. GPLv3 would be even worse as you cannot provide Installation Instructions.

However, WordPress/Automattic has copyright ownership, which means GPLv2 terms don't apply. If you get the app from the App Store, then the App Store terms apply, and if you downloaded the source code from GitHub, then you have GPLv2 terms and can compile and install it yourself. However, you cannot legally submit, say, a modified WordPress app with GPLv2 code in it back to the App Store. This gets tricky if WordPress accepts pull requests under GPLv2 terms, though, as they would then be bound by those terms and no longer be able to offer App Store terms. This is why some Free Software projects require CLAs, so they can both have a strict copyleft and still be on app stores that don't allow that to happen.

Funnily enough I'm pretty sure Microsoft realized this problem, and added an explicit waiver of Microsoft Store TOS terms for software distributed under Free Software terms. I haven't actually checked their TOS in a long while, though, so I may be misremembering things.

<comment><USER25> They openly encourage users to submit contributions in the form of pull requests ^1; they seem to accept pull requests without any special statement of licensing contrary to the GPLv2 repo license ^2; and, they do not openly state in the GitHub repo's Contributor Guidelines any CLA requirement that would permit them to relicense GPLv2 contributions that they merge ^3. (IANYL)

^1 [https://apps.wordpress.com/contribute/](https://apps.wordpress.com/contribute/)

^2 [https://github.com/wordpress-mobile/WordPress- iOS/blob/devel...](https://github.com/wordpress-mobile/WordPress- iOS/blob/develop/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md)

^3 [https://github.com/wordpress-mobile/WordPress- iOS/blob/devel...](https://github.com/wordpress-mobile/WordPress- iOS/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md)

<comment><USER26> The point is that Apple doesn't care if there's GPL code, so it doesn't matter if they "realize" as you said in your original comment. If anything, the project contributors could sue Automattic for violating the terms of their contribution.

<comment><USER27> They could probably sue Apple, too. When someone buys something on the App Store, the store makes a copy and distributes a copy to the purchaser. If that copy is infringing, then the entity that makes and distributes the copy (i.e., Apple) should be liable.

That they received their initial copy from someone else (i.e., Automatic) who told them that they had the rights to make and authorize making and distribution of copies wouldn't protect Apple from suit. It would just mean that in turn Apple would be able to sue Automatic to make them pay any damages and costs Apple incurs over the matter.

<comment><USER28> IANAL but I don't think Apple is liable in this case. It sounds just like websites not being responsible for user created content. They do have to remove illegal content, and must have means to report and act on it, but you can't e.g. sue hackernews because someone posts a torrent of a Marvel movie.

<comment><USER27> All the elements for copyright infringement would be there: (1) Apple made copies and distributed those copies, (2) Apple is not the copyright owner, and (3) Apple does not have a license from the copyright owner.

Apple might not know it is infringing, and indeed might even think it has permission because the developer told it the developer had made sure all the licensing was in order, but the defendant's mental state in a case of direct copyright infringement is not relevant. Copyright infringement does not have a mens rea, at least in the US. "[i]ntention to infringe is not essential under the Act.", Buck v. Jewell-Lasalle Realty Co., 283 U.S. 191, 198 (1931).

The website shield against liability for user created content that is most often used is from section 230 of the CDA. That specifically carves out an exception to the shield for anything relating to intellectual property, so 230 is out.

The DMCA looks like it might work. The people claiming infringement could send a DMCA take down request to Apple, and Apple could take down the content and give them the contact information necessary to sue Automatic, and that should get Apple out of the loop.

But DMCA has limitations, too. If a service provider is infringing themselves, or acts in concert with the people providing the infringing material, then the DMCA safe harbors may not apply. Acting in concert is more than just providing hosting, and I have no idea if Apple does enough more to reach acting in concert. There's some interesting Q&As about DMCA safe harbors at [https://assets.fenwick.com/legacy/FenwickDocuments/DMCA- QA.p...](https://assets.fenwick.com/legacy/FenwickDocuments/DMCA-QA.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I know it won't happen but I wish that all major companies on the Apple store would collaborate and all at once either release in-house in-app purchases or link to their websites to instruct users to buy stuff. Apple can't remove every app from the app-store as the ensuing shitstorm would have people ditching Apple in waves.

<comment><USER30> Epic is trying to get this done. But the companies are afraid that could trigger anti-trust cases against them. It's complicated - but they're watching and I believe big tech has grown tired of Apple's power.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Does apple want legal action against themselves? This is just stupid.

The conspiracy theorist in me says maybe they're trying to make the discussion about about payments and not anticompetitive behavior or the attack on FOSS.

</comment><comment><USER32> Sounds like Apple's doubling down on their lawsuit stance. If they win, they can broadly charge their 30% rent on all digital purchases, maybe even physical ones in the future.

</comment><comment><USER33> Dear Apple, your project of making people hate you JUST WORKS

<comment><USER17> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24210991](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24210991)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Can they (and other developers) join Epic's lawsuit? It would presumably be good for the industry if several players worked together to formulate the legal case against Apple's policies.

</comment><comment><USER35> The mobile device role is such a weird and mutated one. Closed systems like game consoles only run software the vendor approves and buyers go into it knowing it's a specialized device. Real computers can run any software the user wants and buyers fully expect their PCs to be as powerful and flexible as possible. Mobile devices occupy a weird middle ground where vendors try to give the impression they can do anything a PC can while simultaneously holding an iron grip around the entire software ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER36> Wordpress iOS app isn't used for buying domains. It's simply helps manage your website. Apple is going crazy and in a rush to reach the next trillion landmark.

</comment><comment><USER37> Mobile apps were a mistake. Steve Jobs had it right the first time with his "very sweet solution."

It was a good 12 year run, but 2020 is the year mobile apps stopped being cool.

</comment><comment><USER38> It feels like there's a tragedy of the commons situation here -- imagine if Amazon, Spotify, Google, and others unilaterally decided to block Apple. This would surely result in Apple folding

<comment><USER17> As if Amazon and Google are saints. Even if they colluded to "block" Apple (which would be illegal), millions of people would still continue using Apple.

<comment><USER39> It's not illegal or collusion to remove their apps and products from Apple phones. I disagree with you - if you couldn't use instagram / fb messenger(s) / tiktok / YouTube, wayyyy less people would buy Apple.

[https://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search- en...](https://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/)

However, it doesn't look like this is happening anytime soon.

<comment><USER17> Users could still always use the websites, which is what I do for those apps, especially after all the recent news about iOS 14 catching apps like Instagram and others secretly snooping your camera and clipboard etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Mobile team seems doing poor job for the big picture of the apps at Automattic. Ex: Simplenote becomes famous of loss data. Matt should focus on hiring experienced engineers then interview and slack hackers with emojis.

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.automattic...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.automattic.simplenote&hl=en&showAllReviews=true)

</comment><comment><USER41> I don't believe being more perfect in license enforcement is going to save Apple in their anti-trust struggles but I can believe some lawyers may believe that.

</comment><comment><USER42> This is a worrying development for my company. We have B2B products (that can be used from the web and mobile) that customers pay for per account, in bulk. I hope they don't start to apply the 30% cut there - our customers would find it impossible to pay 30% more for every user who uses an iPhone. We would have no choice but to stop having an iPhone app in that case.

</comment><comment><USER43> Ok correct me if I'm wrong, but the rationale is pretty much that since there is a commercial version of Wordpress that this app interacts with, the user should be able to purchase this through Apple's payment gateway?

If this is correct, wouldn't the same logic apply to other tools, such as JIRA and Trello and whatnot? Or am I mistaken?

</comment><comment><USER44> This is all really making me rethink any future purchases of an iPhone. I don't want to be anywhere near this.

</comment><comment> non-entity > using the XML-RPC API included in core WP since WP 2.6 was released in 2008.

Wow this is the first time I think I've heard of a real use of XML-RPC

</comment><comment><USER45> From the authors tweet

"I am a big believer in the sanctity of licenses. (Open source relies on licenses and copyright.) We agreed to this license when we signed up for (and stayed in) the app store, so going to follow and abide by the rules. Not looking to skirt it, hence doing what they asked us to."

I wonder if someone had made that same argument here who wasn't the author, would he get downvoted to oblivion?

</comment><comment><USER46> Why not use the website instead of an App? Other people said Safari is bad, but you aren't trying to play flash games, you are looking at JavaScript at most.

(Not that I'd ever give Apple money, but trying to find solutions to those who made the mistake)

</comment><comment><USER47> might be false/local info, so redacted

<comment><USER48> This is straight up false, at least in my jurisdiction. When I buy apps or in app purchases I get charged a separate 13% HST (Ontario sales tax) _on top of_ the listed price.

<comment><USER47> What is false?

<comment><USER49> The 30% apple fee does not cover taxes/VAT. Those costs are added on top.

<comment><USER47> So we have this equation for what the customer sees:

        dev price + apple comm. + VAT

<comment><USER50> Did you mean:

       dev price + apple VAT + real VAT

<comment><USER47> no, I mean whatever apple takes as commission, plus whatever apple thinks the regional VAT/cost is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I wonder if corporations would be more efficient long term if each layer in the hierarchy simply collected 30% tax from the layer below like capitalism, instead of being run like a dictatorship / communism that they currently run as... I mean if 30% ownership of everything via taxes is good for capitalist governments, maybe it's good for corporations also ?

<comment><USER52> So the Apple store 30% tax would be more like a 30% VAT on the value created by the app - excluding the value already present in prewritten libraries etc the app builds on.

The problem there is that it's impossible to quantify that. VAT works in- practice in retail sales because the value added is trivial to calculate - <USER2> you can't do that with open-source libraries or internal components - or the value created by a platform (e.g. what value does Spotify add on-top of the existing iOS audio and internet capabilities that they're using?)

<comment><USER51> think franchising (or commission based sales or performance based bonuses) taken to an extreme. I understand there are inefficiencies in implementing. And you may lose the govt. tax free intra organization transactions. Just a not really serious thought.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What _should_ be the price of accessing a billion users?

Does any platform allow anyone to charge its users without going through the platform?

Nevermind charging, does -any- platform allow anyone to interact with its users at all without adhering to the platform's terms and conditions?

Can we post anything we want on HN? How about spamming Patreon or GoFundMe links on forums and servers? Why not?

<comment><USER53> The price should be zero. Then platform can offer a service e.g payment gateway at a price but not prevent other payment gateways.

Google search and other search engin do allow. They are platforms, not purely marketplace, so what.

The problem is not whether it is legitimate for a platform to enforce terms and conditions, the problem is what are those terms and conditions. A physical market place can and probably should have some terms and conditions, such as rules around how to not dispose of trash and sanitary, but a term that force participants to purchase a cleaning service _only_ from the marketplace manager is where it would be crossing a line. That is what is being criticized here. Not the existence of terms and conditions to use the app store, it is the restriction to use any other payment gateway, the restriction from communicating that there is an apple tax of 30% and offer an alternative route to the end customer.

Apple has the right to monetise its platform of course, but with a fair business model, not an abusive business model.

<comment><USER26> Google Search absolutely charges its customers, who are advertisers. It charges them a lot of money to show their ads to the billions of users.

<comment><USER53> Yes and we are free to also let other search engines index the sites. I can use any device including Google devices and access Google search or any other search engines and pay producers of content or software. Google doesn't force anyone to use its search, it doesn't make an exclusive deal to be indexed either, despite their dominance.

Not saying Google act like saints with its ad system these days, but I simply cited an example of a Platform that built a business model where nobody is being excluded from the platform because they somehow circumvent payments going to Google (via ads).

We can block the ads, we can ignore the ads, we can use another search engine to access the same content. Power and freedom to the participants.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why-nuclear-is-inherently-safe - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/03/11/it-sounds-crazy-but-fukushima-chernobyl-and-three-mile-island-show-why-nuclear-is-inherently-safe/#2a5135f31688 <comment><AUTHOR> ||"Every scientist and radiation expert in the world who comes here says the same thing," he said. "We know we don't need to reduce radiation levels for public health. We're doing it because the people want us to."

And that is the biggest problem we have today. Our "Leaders" do not lead but just play the part.</comment>


Ask HN: Best material/sites to teach my father basic computer literacy?  - <AUTHOR>

My father just became excited when he learned how to copy and paste. I decided I need to teach him some basics.
I was looking online for some good videos/tutorials but most of them are either:
a) created in 1990s
b) infomercial quality
Can anyone with experience teaching computers to technically disinclined people recommend videos/books/sites??
This may be a business opportunity for a well designed site with screencasts and social features. <comment><USER2> I've seen some video tutorials here <http://www.video-tutes.com/> but I never used them and I'm not on windows so my particular knowledge may not be super useful... <http://www.apple.com/findouthow/mac/> mac has a bunch of vids and there are these guys <http://showmedo.com/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Http://mintywhite.com is really good for Windows Guides, and they have an active forum for noob's.</comment>


How Apple and other corporations move profit to avoid taxes - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/business/how-apple-and-other-corporations-move-profit-to-avoid-taxes.html?pagewanted=all

<comment><USER2> This should really point to the full-page article:

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/business/how-apple-and-other-corporations-move-profit-to-avoid-taxes.html?pagewanted=all

And the title should be updated to the actual article title: "Apple's Move Keeps Profit Out of Reach of Taxes"</comment>


Color Genomics raises $45M to provide genetic tests that detect cancer risk - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/27/color-genomics-raises-45-million-to-provide-cheaper-genetic-tests-that-detect-cancer-risk/ <comment><USER2> Folks, everyone in the world who can get their hands on an illumina sequencer is developing these "30 gene", "400 gene", "N gene" tests, liquid biopsies, blah, blah, blah. Even the fact that they got a VC to shell out $45M is something happen pretty regularly now. Source: senior pathology resident in San Diego, driving past illumina and the Craig Venter Institute every day. Developing these tests is literally all molecular pathologists do. All day long.

The game is to actually get a lot of patients. Memorial Sloan Kettering, Foundation One, Broad Institute, Venter are the biggest data-gatherers I'm aware of right now, with the DoD starting to get in the game. But who really wins will be the platforms that do the bioinformatics analysis: Google Genomics, illumina (basespace), etc.

And the ethics questions and "we don't know about the environment" questions aren't going to get answered until the data is collected. Wait till the EMRs are tied into the big data pipelines. Oh, nellie.

<comment><USER3> Yep. Academic molecular biolgist here. 100% agree. For as much as this community knows about software it knows shockingly little about the rules of health care.

Hate to break it to everyone breathless over yet another press clipping, but this startup is dead in the water. Another $45M down the tubes.

<comment><USER4> Are you saying the lack of access to data will be the issue? Or following health laws?

If they get some limited access to data, develop the machine learning software better than anyone, whats stopping one of the big pharma companies from shelling out $1B to acquire the company? Getting access to a tech team + IP could be very valuable. Pharma companies aren't known for their software teams either and this seems to be the core of their business offering here. Not the tests that everyone's already doing... I mean I just reread the article and they aren't claiming this is their core business proposition at all (as the OP seems to imply).

Even Illumina makes $2B in revenue currently. There's lots of money in the pharma industry and they always converge on a few big firms. They don't need to be original to provide real technical value here.

Unlike the pharma industry where you shield your IP with lawyers for 10 yrs, being first means nothing in the software world. It's about who can do it best.

The founders comments here also clarifies that they aren't going after new interesting areas because they are focusing on commercializing something that works right now and advancing that data science aspect of it, instead of making a future play on some original R&D.

<comment><USER3> Fair enough. Though to prove that their tech is better is definitely a data access issue. I obviously wish them luck but some ex-Twitter employees doesn't sound like a very leveraged team to be better at health data acquisition or data science. Unlike Twitter or Facebook, being good at science requires acquired knowledge. So even starting a bio PhD as one of the guy's did, the strength of their competitors and the carcasses of people before wouldn't give me any confidence to throw any amount of money let alone $45M at this thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is border line academic imperialism. The founders seem to think that software engineering and data science applied to biological data will provide insight that traditional biology has not found. Unneccessary screening from a single dimension (genome) is only going to misguide patients into oppurtunistic drug companies and non-FDA approved remedies.

We are still unsure of the nature/nuture problem. What if the environment is more attributable to cancer development?

<comment><USER6> Elad started his career with a PhD in cancer biology prior to starting the mobile team at Google, so I don't think "academic imperialism" is an accurate descriptor.

I think you'll see more people with these hybrid skills over time. They take years to develop, though.

If we want advancement in medicine, can we really do it without deep collaboration between biology and computer science? If so, isn't Color Genomics a model of particularly deep cross-disciplinary work, not academic imperialism?

<comment><USER7> > If we want advancement in medicine, can we really do it without deep > collaboration between biology and computer science?

There's an entire field for that already, it's called _bioinformatics_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Here's their white-paper on their testing methodology: [https://s3.amazonaws.com/color-static- prod/pdfs/validationWh...](https://s3.amazonaws.com/color-static- prod/pdfs/validationWhitePaper.pdf)

"Color has developed a next-generation sequencing based test for hereditary cancer. This test analyzes 30 genes associated with increased risk to develop breast, ovarian, colorectal, melanoma, pancreatic, prostate, stomach, and uterine cancers... The assay has a high degree of analytical validity for the detection of single nucleotide variants, small insertions and deletions (indels), and larger deletions and duplications (copy number variants, or CNVs)."

So not micro-arrays like 23andMe that test for SNPs ($99?), but not full genome sequencing either (~$1,000?); but specific sequencing for the sites of these genomic regions of those 30 genes.

Wet Lab sequencing method: "Specifically, it includes target enrichment by Agilent's SureSelect method (v1.7) and sequencing by Illumina's NextSeq 500 (paired-end 150bp, High Output kit)"; Unanswered question, are they doing the sequencing in-house or using a facility somewhere else?

Computational method: "The bioinformatics pipeline was built using well- established algorithms such as BWA-MEM, SAMtools, Picard and GATK. CNVs are detected using dedicated internally developed algorithms for read depth analysis and split-read alignment detection."

So basically perform the standard genome assembly, alignment with human reference genome of your partial assembly, and then identify what variant of these 30 genes the patient sample has; plus a special sauce for counting the number of specific bp repeats, due to in-del events, this is not something I am not too familiar, but presumably the number of a specific k-mer repeats you have in these genes of interest might correlate to a specific type of cancer? (would love to hear someone who is an expert in this field their opinion).

"These [30] genes are APC, ATM, BAP1, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1,BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A (p14ARF and p16INK4a), CHEK2, EPCAM, GREM1, MITF, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, POLD1, POLE, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, and TP53". (You can follow up by searching them here, e.g., [http://www.genecards.org/cgi- bin/carddisp.pl?gene=BRCA2&keyw...](http://www.genecards.org/cgi- bin/carddisp.pl?gene=BRCA2&keywords=BRCA2)).

Also interesting to note, since it's clinical, each of their test has to be verified by a certified "genetics counselor" and also meet lots of clinical standards.

<comment><USER9> _plus a special sauce for counting the number of specific bp repeats, due to in-del events, this is not something I am not too familiar, but presumably the number of a specific k-mer repeats you have in these genes of interest might correlate to a specific type of cancer? (would love to hear someone who is an expert in this field their opinion)._

"Copy number variant" refers to larger deletions and duplications that can occur in the genome. There isn't some specific cutoff for size, but some examples in these kinds of genes would be an entire exon or gene. There are countless studies that find correlations between specific variants or CNVs and risk of cancers.

Standard variant detection is pretty straightforward. CNVs are harder because they are longer (several hundred to several thousand base pairs) than the raw data (150 to 250 bp for Illumina)- you don't get single reads that span the entire variant. You have to normalize then look for differences in coverage, or look for split reads (where the read is aligned on the border of one of these CNVs).

This kind of funding baffles me because they don't seem to be proposing anything new at all (maybe slightly better CNV detection?) and there are already lots of labs/companies doing this kind of testing. Maybe they are working on being very efficient to offer a better price.

<comment><USER8> Thanks for your detailed explanation.

Just out of curiosity and to follow-up, presumably this is a example of the list of detected CNVs in a TCGA Breast Cancer data-set you're referring to: [http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/gene/analysis?ln=BRCA1#cnv...](http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/gene/analysis?ln=BRCA1#cnv_t)

According to Sanger (or maybe TCGA?), a gain is when a genomic region (for a diploid) has more than five absolute copies of this region and a loss is when the genomic region has no reads (([http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/help/cnv/overview](http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/help/cnv/overview)), where the copy number is perhaps determined by that normalized distribution of read coverage across the reference genome?

([http://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/...](http://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2105-14-S11-S1#Fig1)). This is for CNVs that are longer than the 150-200bp Illumina fragments (Fig1c. Read Depth method, e.g., exome#3 looks like it has two absolute copies vs exome #1 and #2)

Then for small CNVs that perhaps span that 150-200bp fragment, we use the split read method to filter for incompletely mapped reads that are only aligned on the edges to the reference. This implies that there was a duplication event that expanded that sequence? (Fig 1b. Split Read method).

Presumably, the pipeline would determine the CNV sites in a specific patient sample, then cross-reference with the TCGA CNV data-set and come up with correlation score of how much those CNVs sites match with consensus CNVs in the cancer data-set? Thanks again for your detailed breakdown.

<comment><USER9> The Sanger/TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) stuff seems to be specific to microarray data which is different (older, more expensive) than the newer high-throughput data.

The figure you linked is a good explanation. The split read method is helpful for finding the edges of the CNV, while the number of reads (relative to other regions that were tested) can give an idea of the number of copies. The problem is that these methods all have their own unique biases/noise that makes it non-trivial to figure out the absolute copy number change.

Ideally they would find a similar CNV that has some clinical association.

The DGV has a lot of reference CNVs. Here are some in BRCA1: [http://dgv.tcag.ca/gb2/gbrowse/dgv2_hg19/?name=id:3087443;db...](http://dgv.tcag.ca/gb2/gbrowse/dgv2_hg19/?name=id:3087443;dbid=gene:database)

<comment><USER8> Thanks jrm5100 for the link. I see the variants under the "DGV Structural Variants" track. Really appreciate your explaining what CNVs are and also following up on my questions/confusions!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I am not sure there is really a large enough corpus of data out there that covers multiple facets of this system to really give us a strong predictive value. Just variant calls is probably not enough. There might be, if we can somehow consolidate and integrate disparate datasets from various publications and labs. But I don't think we are at that stage yet.

I am all for them trying though. I just don't think we are at a point where we can make a good diagnosis/conclusion yet.

</comment><comment><USER11> Does anybody know the total number / exact list of SNPs covered in this panel? How about the read depth?

I found this whitepaper on their website, which provides some level of detail...

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/color-static- prod/pdfs/validationWh...](https://s3.amazonaws.com/color-static- prod/pdfs/validationWhitePaper.pdf)

However, there were a good many asterisks and caveats about not testing every position along these genes (some of which are quite large).

While I'm not aware of any other companies that are doing this type of direct to consumer testing, companies like Myriad have offered targeted panels on some of these gene targets for some time.

[http://myriadgenetics.eu/products/](http://myriadgenetics.eu/products/)

</comment><comment><USER12> There are already companies that do this... Today they are called innovators, tomorrow they'll be called money-grubbing, unethical, anti-FDA maniacs for do the same thing.</comment>


Don't found a company unless you love Excel - <AUTHOR> http://ekoester.com/dont-found-a-company-unless-you-love-excel

<comment><USER2> _Valid point_ \- you eventually want your revenue to be larger than your expenses (unless you plan to get acqui-hired...)

 _Invalid point_ \- you need Excel to figure that out. I think a good hacker is more likely to use some combination of R, Python + Pandas, databases and CSV files to do most of their financial modelling. Then those all-important month-end reports can just be automated away...

<comment><USER3> I work in finance, I toyed with Python and Pandas and CSV files for a while, it won't do. When you get at it, you soon realize that any kind of decision will have to come from high level numbers, no the billions of rows you hear on HN and, in that area, it makes simply no sense using anything other than Excel.

<comment><USER4> If it won't take you too long, would you mind sharing a couple of examples?

<comment><USER3> High level? Think about cash flow _forecast_. How you do this? You need to model your income statement and balance sheet. Start building up assumptions for: sales (duh), accounts receivables, overdues, your cogs, inventory, possible capex investments, opex, etc.

This is very structured data, you can build up hierarchy trees in python, but it will take you too long. Plus, your models will change, people will want to see things from many different changing angles.

Unfortunately, every time I start writing about controlling people desert the thread around here, but it is a fascinating topic.

<comment><USER5> Go on. I'd like to hear more.

<comment><USER3> I answer all on this topic, just shoot me an email

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Don't found a company unless you understand basic business concepts and maintain an accurate audit trail of your financial operations (or use/employ someone who does) - sure. Using Excel? Maybe, but it's not the only option so the original article is way off the mark being so specific. It's akin to saying "if you want to make a telephone call, use an iPhone".

Anyway, based on my current employer, spreadsheets are for:

Holiday rotas

Support call logs / case management

Weekly status reporting (because the format I was using in Word was so tabular 'it might as well be done in a spreadsheet' \- go figure!)

Project Management (Make a GANTT chart by colouring in various width/Joined cells) and then spend ages manually adjusting things when dependencies slip.

Manually copying/pasting data from an on-screen query so it can be sorted and deduped before being put into an email. I have now automated the whole process.

</comment><comment><USER7> If I'm starting a company, don't I want R and E to satisfy an inequality (and one in a particular direction) instead of an equation?

More seriously, Excel has many problems that make it unsuitable for anything that might require statistical analysis. See for example B.D. McCullough and Berry Wilson, "On the accuracy of statistical procedures in Microsoft Excel 2003," Comput. Statist. Data Anal. 49 (2005), no. 4, 1244--1252, available online at [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2004.06.016](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2004.06.016) but paywalled. I thought that this article, or a similar one, was recently discussed on HN, but I could not find an appropriate link.

On the other hand, I don't know anything about business. I can see an argument for using a widely-deployed piece of software for verifying R > E even if it is inappropriate for data analysis.

<comment><USER8> You definitely don't want to be using Excel for heavy data analysis or statistical analysis, and unfortunately some companies refuse to acknowledge that. Performance is very often sacrificed for familiarity and ease-of-use in business.

<comment><USER9> Even as spreadsheets go, I wouldn't use Excel for statistical analysis (I wouldn't use any spreadsheet unless it was a function coded as a macro). It's not just a performance thing, but also a confidence in results thing. Spreadsheets admit to oversimplifying the processing and then having issues as the assumptions in the data change.

This does not mean that a spreadsheet couldn't be an important piece of the pipeline though. Database to Spreadsheet is actually a very powerful combination, particularly with views.

<comment><USER8> Absolutely agree with you. Database-to-spreadsheet is the best way to analyze data then summarize the results in a business setting. Unfortunately, the people seeing the results occasionally want to see how you got to your numbers, and since they frequently have non-technical backgrounds the database step is often where they can no longer follow.

I worked at a company where our data was in SQL Server but we basically had to import the entire data set into Excel because none of the higher-ups knew SQL and wouldn't be able to peer review. Those spreadsheets were slooooooow.

<comment><USER9> Wow, that sucks.

It's funny, the other co-founder of Efficito is a financial analyst who writes tools to do his analysis for him in Lisp. He also maintains a Common Lisp implementation. Fortunately I bet your former employer would not be interested in his services.

<comment><USER5> I'd love to see the source for what he's doing. Sounds neat.

<comment><USER9> I am not aware of any ones he has released source for sadly. For a general idea though see [http://weitz.de/eclm2013/abcl.pdf](http://weitz.de/eclm2013/abcl.pdf)

It includes some code snippets and screen shots of hybrid Java/Lisp programs. He is also a maintainer of Armed Bear Common Lisp.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've built GrantTree's financial modelling (real time, to the penny) using a Ruby/Rails back end and FreeAgent for the transaction management.

No Excel in sight. The only thing we use Excel for is client calculations and holiday tracking.

<comment><USER11> Well, it is probably possible to do financial modelling in Erlang (fault tolerance, etc) or Go (good concurrency support).

But why would you need this? You can do financial model in 1 hour using Excel...

<comment><USER10> Because it is far more clever than anything I could do in Excel. And it doesn't require me to duplicate information all over the place. I'd rather have just one master source of data that I do all the calculations on.

<comment><USER12> If you're doing deep analysis on large historical data, then it's in essence a MIS system, and most businesses do (and should do) that outside of Excel.

But what the article is about, in a growing startup or a changing company (say, completely new product line) the 'one master source of data' is not in a database but the assumptions in your head; and any clever model based on your historical data will be either impossible or far more wrong than a simple order-of-magnitude calculation done on a paper napkin. And, well, Excel is more convenient than the napkin.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> DO NOT use Excel to do your accounts on use a real accounting package!

I say that as one of the factors in a VC company I worked for going bust was that they used some dodgy spreadsheet as part of it accounting system.

<comment><USER9> It's not the end of the world to do accounts in a spreadsheet. In fact for certain sorts of things, they are really ideal.

However, it is a huge mistake to keep your general ledger or book of original entry in Excel. The reason has nothing to do with making mistakes or errors and every thing to do about fraud. Paper is the gold standard in anti-fraud accounting systems, particularly if you follow the standard rules like ensuring books are kept in pen. Paper to Excel is fine. Replacing the paper with Excel is not.

<comment><USER11> I would be curious to know for which sort of accounting things Excel is ideal?

Sorry, I could not comprehend the second paragraph.

Fraud has nothing to do with paper or computer based system. To minimize risk of fraud you need to implement proper sets of controls, like segregation of duties, etc.

As for Excel - Excel is a poor instrument for doing the accounting, therefore it shall not be used ... unless you have some kind of micro/nano business.

<comment><USER9> > I would be curious to know for which sort of accounting things Excel is > ideal?

Well, let's see.

1\. Preprocessing data for entry. This might be used, for example, if you want to depreciate fixed assets using a method your accounting software does not support.

2\. Post-processing data. You might do this if you have a report from an accounting system but your final report needs to take into account additional factors. Some of my customers use Excel to turn trial balance data from their accounting systems into financial statements.

Another example of post-processing might be if you take aggregated sales reports from an accounting system and further process it by business folk who don't know the programming environment.

As for paper: Yes, separation of duties is a part of it but paper has an advantage that no computer system can match, namely that if you keep your books in indelible ink, then alteration of numbers is obvious on audit. This is a weak point of electronic media. You can lock it down, but it is always possible for someone to unlock it. So with comparable policies, paper wins out anti-fraud-wise.

<comment><USER11> Interesting, actually what you mention is not an accounting per se, but I agree with you, specifically

>> 1\. Pre-processing data for the entry.

For this specific example if the accounting package does not support certain depreciation method (which rather rare), you can easily do this in Excel, both for financial modelling purposes and as a supporting document for the accounting entry.

>> 2\. Post-processing data.

What you describe is not accounting. This is financial and management reporting. Yes, Excel is what is used by most everyone.

Good points.

<comment><USER9> Perhaps I have a more expansive definition of "accounting" than you ;-) I do agree that Excel is not and never should be a primary tool for _bookkeeping._

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> svbtle and medium: link-baiting so you don't have to

</comment><comment><USER15> I started a company and I hate excel.

<comment><USER16> It's doomed to fail in that case.

<comment><USER17> I want to start a company or go freelance because I hate excel so much. My non technical co-workers insist on using it (for almost everything).

I estimate around 80% of the problems with our system come from using Excel to upload data.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I do not want to sound negative, but this post is complete water...

What you need is:

\- understand your numbers, which requires knowledge, brain and a bit of experience;

\- accurate numbers, which shall be output by accounting.

You can prepare P&L forecast for $50-100M business on one piece of paper, if needed. Excel just makes things more efficient.

</comment><comment><USER18> I am using Google Spreadsheet.

</comment><comment><USER19> Excel spreadsheets are fantastic for one-time, throwaway calculations.

If you want to save, share, or reuse anything, though, it's a one-way ticket to versioning hell, and you need to run scheduled reports off a database.

Excel gets really dangerous when people who don't know anything about databases try to use it as a database.

<comment><USER5> Obligatory link:

[http://wyorock.com/excelasadatabase.htm](http://wyorock.com/excelasadatabase.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Sounds like a market opportunity. Aside from simple accounting (tracking revenue and expenses), what's the range of startup needs that are covered by Excel?

If these needs aren't met by current accounting / finance packages, it definitely opens the door for a new competitor.

</comment><comment><USER21> I would never use a spreadsheet for basing decisions on. It is just too error prone. I do not know how many trillions of euros (and dollars) have been wasted due to some excel sheets having off-by-one errors in marking rows or similar issues.

</comment><comment><USER5> Has anyone here ever done their startup's financial modeling in code instead? And if so, can you share your code sans your real data and assumptions.

</comment><comment><USER22> Don't be a marketeer unless you love PowerPoint.

</comment><comment><USER23> There is a thing called openoffice, or even better LibreOffice, there's almost nothing that you can do in Excel that you can't in LibreOffice

<comment><USER24> ... for various definitions of "almost". Depending on your needs, Open/Libre may run circles around Excel, or fail laughably. Just like Emacs vs. Vi, Language1 vs. Language2, it all depends on your needs and available time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Same can be said for a PhD

</comment><comment><USER26> cli script anyone? you obviously dont have to love excel...

<comment><USER12> How would you write and explore, say, a cash flow forecast of a not-yet- existing product line with a cli script? I could imagine doing that in emacs, maybe, because you can probably do everything there; or on plain paper if you're quick+accurate with doing math in your head.. but in a cli script ?</comment></comment>