On 20 September 2022, Luhansk Oblast governor Serhiy Haidai reported that Russian troops had "razed [Bilohorivka] to the ground" during their failed attempts to recapture it, stating that Ukrainian forces had full control of the town.[78]
On 18 October, Russia attempted an assault with artillery support on Bilohorivka, but the attack was repulsed. Russian troops continued to shell liberated settlements.
The armored vehicle assaults and drones destroy trenches and buildings, make craters too, but the sheer extent and size of those craters is from artillery. The tank battles weren't too destructive relatively IIRC
I recently discovered after years of using this app that it's possible to have the names of the birds in other languages than English, it's an option in the app settings.
You mixed it up, the guy who lost his finger was a well off co-founder of a crypto company but not super duper rich himself, he was however the friend of a super rich of his co-founders. The goal was to extract money from this other person by hurting his friend.
There was however another case with the french familly of a Dubaï expatriated influencer, with a happier ending this time.
They don't have it mixed up. There were two separate cases with mutilated hands in the news recently, both France. You speak of the Ledger co-founder while GP of another.
After all these years I fail to understand how people seemingly versed in the subject are still spelling Etherium with an "i" instead of an "e". I wonder if all the occurrences of the error are made by people of the same linguistic origin. Out of pure curiosity, I wonder if you could share if you're an English native ? If so, it would rule out this hypothesis. If you are not an English native, would you share your mother tongue with me ? I myself am (an admittedly nosey) French.
Also, “Ethereum” looks like a misspelling to me; even though we’ve got “petroleum” and “linoleum” my instinct is to replace it with the more common “-ium” ending from the Periodic Table.
However, I have never been inclined to pronounce or spell “Dubai” with a diaresis, because it’s an Arabic word with a diphthong.
I am a native speaker of American English, second language Spanish; polyglot including proficiency in Latin, Italian, Greek, Sanskrit, and Semitic family.
Interesting, thanks.
About Dubai, in french it would be pronounced "Du-bay" without the diaresis. It is not ambiguous in english though, but it never occurred to me !
It sure would be nice to see the data on length of time between doses to prevent toxicity. The fact they deleted all of that data sure is suspicious and incredibly worrying.
A little caveat of Web Bluetooth API is that it's like WebUSB and mostly available on Chrome. I don't think Chrome for iOS is using blink yet so you'll probably not have access to this API on iOS.
There isn’t a default on iOS, you’re prompted for each new app when it requests notification permissions. People have found that users hit no a lot more when the app prompts with no explanation than when it clearly explains what benefit it has to the user.
PWAs offer support for push notifications [1], but apparently they are not as seamless as in native apps, especially on iOS.
If you've never heard of PWAs [2], they allow you to add native mobile app functionality to a mobile website, including the ability to install your website as though it were an app, and ability to cache resources for offline use. I haven't worked on app development for a while, but when I did several years ago, all that was required to turn a mobile website in to a PWA was a service worker file (a JS file to define resource caching rules), and a manifest.json file (essentially metadata used by the home screen icon, including title and icon image).
Apparently PWAs still aren't on par with native apps in terms of capability and UX. Nonetheless I hope PWAs become popular for their simplicity, and for being decoupled from platforms. It's a bit insane to me that native app development usually requires heavy platform specific IDEs (Android Studio, Xcode), both of which have steep learning curves, and after all that development effort, you only have an app that works on 1 platform. Building a basic mobile app shouldn't require anything more than HTML, JS and CSS, and it shouldn't be tied to any specific platform.
I hope this will make Apple finally comply with EU law and allow app side loading on iOS. Real side loading, not the joke they implemented since iOS 17.
That is not so clear. Appstore revenue is ~ $100 billion/y, but Apple makes less than 30% from that.
So the question is: Would more convincing compliance have cost Apple more than single digit percentage decreases in Appstore sales? Comparing the F-Droid vs Playstore situation, this seems unlikely to me.
If Apple is so bad at this that they have to charge 30%, they should have failed in the free market to a competitor that can do the same or better for 3%. However, Apple has prevented that, not by being better or cheaper, but by implementing DRM that locks users out from having a choice (and the market as a whole ended up being a duopoly with cartel-like pricing).
Whether Apple can be cheaper isn't really the point (they should be, digital services are a very high margin business). It's that they're anti-competitive to the point that the market for paid apps and in-app payments became inefficient (in a financial sense).
You are trying to tell me that credit card processing fees are negligible, software engineers work for free, advertising doesn’t require overhead, etc…
I guess that kind of thinking that everything is basically free is why alot of startups just fail so easily.
Your profit is whatever your revenue minus costs. Plenty of app stores have operated in the red that we know this isn’t trivial to get right. It definitely is nowhere near negligible as patent asserted. I’m frustrated by how dumb HN is getting lately.
The actual fines for this moving forward are up to 10% of a companies global revenue. The EU made a big point to say that this is the first time they are issuing those fines and as a result they are smaller than they otherwise would be especially in the case of repeat offenders.
Ie. "More than half of users have installed at least one app from a non-apple affiliated store by Jan 2026 or you shall pay a fine of $10 per month per iPhone in use in the EU".
That’s a terrible idea. How would they have any control over that. I think you are way overestimating the amount of iOS users that want to use software from outside the App Store.
If 3rd party stores didn't charge the Apple tax, I think you'd find plenty of apps moving to other stores, and within a matter of weeks more than half of users would have used a 3rd party store.
I want the equivalent of a shops in the real world. One shop doesn't carry everything. Even Spotify doesn't carry everything. For one, Apple doesn't allow adult content apps. Steam does. I'm sure there's a market for adult games on iPhone as Steam's success there would seem to suggest. I don't think Apple should be required to sell adult games but I also don't think they should get to dictate that people can't use their phones for adult games. So, more stores would great.
Yeah but these companies will force me to install their garbage third party app stores to install their apps. I really just want one good, properly vetted app store on my phone, is that so hard to understand?
If you ever tried out third party app stores on Android you’ll see what I mean. See also the crappy launchers/stores major game publishers try to force on you on PCs.
That really depends on the store. If Value made a Steam store, or Nintendo made a Nintendo store with Nintendo exclusives I'd expect millions of installs.
Generally, as a society, we hold that a contract cannot be modified without both parties’ agreement. When you bought that phone, it was with the completely clear, overt, and in no way uncertain understanding that it does specifically X Y Z, and does not do A B C. Now, without additional payment to the counterparty, you’re demanding your phone do A B C. What am I missing? According to accepted understandings of contracts, how are you possibly in the right? How are you possibly in a position to demand government use force to modify a contract you accepted before to somehow benefit you more at a cost to your counterparty?
You are of the opinion that it is reasonable for a company to expect you to read, understand and fully agree with a contract that consists of countless pages of opaque legalese and that you have no say in whatsoever, just in order to use a service that's arguably a necessity to participate in public life?
The EU does not seem to share that opinion, and puts some restrictions on these types of 'contracts'. Are you really concerned that this is somehow unfair towards these companies? Companies that retain whole teams of lawyers to create a contract that hardly any of its billion counter parties (individual consumers) can fully comprehend, let alone push back on?
My rant was about the rationale for government restricting ToS contracts in general. Apple is indeed not as unavoidable for participating in public life as some others. The only alternative being 'agreeing to' the Google contract of course.
The parent post said “service that's arguably a necessity to participate in public life”. I’m not sure what universe you live in, but in mine everyday life is entirely possible without iPhones.
I'm not sure what society you are referring to but contracts have to adhere to laws in the EU.
This is also about software that is being updated. So the transaction is not completed yet. Apple could probably go the route of not providing the update to phones that were sold before the law was voted on/in place. I would guess that would lead to other legal battles.
And is it reasonable that the laws are created after the contract was already agreed to and still apply to it? At least here in the United States, laws are not allowed to make things illegal that happened before the laws were written.
If I have a sales contract with you where I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, and on Monday hamburgers are outlawed, I still owe you on Tuesday. If purchases or hamburgers on credit is outlawed on Monday, I most likely still owe you on Tuesday.
Otoh, if I pay you today for a hamburger on Tuesday, and on Monday hamburgers are outlawed, you can't perform your part of the contract, and we'll need to figure things out.
The rules can change, and when the rules change, continuing service may need to change (depending on how the rules were written); I'm sure part of the contracts involved also describe a) how to make changes in the services, b) what happens when parts of the contract are discovered to be unenforcable or illegal.
Laws can definitively be retroactive or affect existing contracts. Imagine a world where governments have no power to stop anti-social behavior if it was ever baked into private contracts ?
Also the DMA didn't fall from the sky one day and enforced the next. Every business impacted had years to do something about it, and they preferred to play chicken race instead.
> Imagine a world where governments have no power to stop anti-social behavior
They DO have the power to STOP it, they just cannot punish past behaviour which was legal at the time! At least in USA, this is directly in the constitution:
Article 1 § 9 prohibits Congress from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
Article 1 § 10 prohibits the states from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
SCOTUS also clarified this in Beazell v. Ohio:
"It is settled, by decisions of this Court so well known that their citation may be dispensed with, that any statute which punishes as a crime an act previously committed, which was innocent when done, which makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or which deprives one charged with crime of any defense available according to law at the time when the act was committed, is prohibited as ex post facto."
Now, I know that this is EU and not USA, but my argument is that EU is the ones being unreasonable here. It is illogical to make something illegal and then punish those who had done it before it was made so.
There's a range of anti-competitive behavior which can subvert that ideal, and as such there's regulation aimed to prevent it. Apple used to forbid apps from telling users about Apple's 30% cut or cheaper places to buy the app, for instance, hindering users from making an informed choice.
Many of the policies in question are intentionally not publicized to end-users, often requiring first paying to be part of the developer program before you can even see what you need to agree to to publish an app.
> Apple allows no-questions-asked full-refund returns for two weeks.
That's the bare legal minimum in the EU. Many anti-competitive practices are not things consumers find out about within some short fixed period of time, if at all, and others are not solved by a refund even when the customer is aware of the issue.
True that it does now all (including schedules 2/3 and the guidelines) appear to be publicly available. Looks as if this was done on June 7th 2021, shortly after the EU Commission had sent the Statement of Objections on April 30th 2021.
A documentary? Really? They have a long tradition of setting up scenes to show the view they want you to see. There is some fact behind some, but there is no requirement that they be true.
Cows don't run out of the barn in any case I've ever seen - they walk. The young calfs run out, but not the older cows. (and maybe some of the young cows). If you typical cow is running it is because she is scared.
Man, hear me out. You haven't even searched for it, and you make generalities to prove your point. Can you please give me benefit of the doubt until you've actually checked it out ? "Cow" is not a shitty partisan documentary, there's no narration at all, it simply presents the life of some cows in a medium exploitation in the UK through the seasons. It's quite unique. I've never seen another documentary like this one.
