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

Was wondering the same thing, and downloaded the source to experiment. I’m on Mac.

What do you think it would take?


It's not that difficult. I would recommend to use not the most recent OS and compiler version, otherwise you risk that only users having your or a later OS/compiler version can use it.


EXACTLY. I called them out on this bullshit the other day, and they tried to sell me a “small business” commercial license or something.

FORK YOU, Qt Company!


I just had the maintenance of an Android app dumped in my lap, and I’m dreading it. I have a decent amount of experience with iOS development and have been pretty impressed.

But everyone characterizes Android as a shítshow. As a consumer, Android’s profound problems are evident from the fact that millions of devices are orphaned soon after release, because users must wait for every telco to dribble out a special version of the OS for every device, one at a time.

WTF? This is a 21st-century OS?


You’re not the business owner who just had his reputation stolen.


And it will be users, not business owners, who decide whether that matters. So far users have accepted everything from Yelp's bullying to DoorDash's grabbing of online real estate, to Amazon's army of fake reviews.


Not accurate. The AOPA typically takes positions that protect public safety, such as opposing Trump’s attempted giveaway of our ATC to the airlines.

However, the GA industry should be condemned for its failure to face the writing on the wall about leaded gas, which has been obvious since the ‘70s. On the other hand: Until recently, stifling certification requirements made it nearly impossible for these low-volume manufacturers to innovate.

Nobody wants leaded gas.

The other sham being perpetrated is advertising some plane engines as running on “automotive” gas. This is BS, because that means only PURE gasoline, not gasohol. I challenge you to find a gas station selling 100% gasoline. I haven’t seen that in decades. So the touted “mogas” is nearly as much of a niche fuel as 100LL.



Way more than that these days. There’s only one supplier of 100LL, and even they don’t want to be in the business anymore.


Let's start with the fact that Apple is forcing people to use an E-mail address as a user ID. That's just straight-up stupid.

How many members of the public think that they have to use their E-mail account password as their password for Apple ID and every other amateur-hour site that enforces this dumb rule?

MILLIONS. I would bet a decent amount of money on it. So if any one of these sites is hacked and the user database is compromised, all of the user's Web log-ins that have this policy are wide open.

Then there's the simple fact that everyone's E-mail address is on thousands of spammers' lists. A simple brute-force attack using the top 100 passwords is also going to yield quite a trove, I'd imagine.

Apple IDs didn't originally have to be E-mail addresses. They're going backward.


The thing that made this bug possible was because, while your Apple ID has to be an email address, Apple has a mechanism to avoid exposing it to third parties - unlike Google, Apple, or Facebook's single sign-on implementation; the bug seems to be in the step between verifying your identity and telling Apple whether you would or would not like your email address to be exposed.

If anything, the issue is that third parties treat the email address as a unique, unchangeable identity, and then agree to rely on Apple's assertion of what your email address is. But given how hard identity is - and the challenges in dealing with passwords, account recovery, and name changes at scale - it's a pretty reasonable tradeoff to make.


The point wasn’t that the address is exposed by Apple; it’s that E-mail addresses are widely exposed by USERS, out of necessity.


Sign in with facebook also lets the user choose whether or not to share their email address.


WTF is a "zero-day?"


This is always the argument against tabs, but it makes no sense. So what?

If you don’t like your tab width, CHANGE IT. That’s a huge win over spaces, where indentation is hard-coded.


I somehow forgot to add the essential part of my comment. Sorry, here it is:

If someone prefers a narrow tab width and breaks lines based on that, then someone who prefers a wide tab width will get overfull lines:

    20 column limit, 2-column tabs:
    if (a==b) {         |
      if (b==c) {       |
        some_function();|

    20 column limit, 4-column tabs:
    if (a==b) {         |
        if (b==c) {     |
            some_functio| <- overfull line
Either way, the project has to set some sort of official tab width. Or at least, a maximum tab width.


Yep. I have yet to hear a coherent argument against tabs.

It’s such a tiresome squabble.


Douglas Crockford made an interesting argument in favour of spaces: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En8Ubs2k1O8


Vertical alignment of related lines.


If you indent with tabs, you can still align with spaces for vertical alignment.


That’s the whole point of tabs. How is this an argument against them?


Because it doesn't work with tabs, someone else will have a different tab-width.


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

Search: