kinkdr

Don’t be fooled, Uber deserves all the bad publicity and negative bias it gets.

> There’s a long way to go, so please give feedback

Please don't ask for my Gmail account.

> Why not apply for a permit and stay on the safe side?

When did Uber obey the law? Why would they start now?

Edit: Apologies for my tone, but Uber has demonstrated quite a few times in the past that they don't have any respect for the law.

I just noticed it today, 241 days after I created my account, and probably more than a year since I started reading HN.

Isn't this how most people use the "upvote" button already anyway?

Does anyone know the history behind "this"?

Is there any other language that uses "this" to denote "current context"?

Cool, thanks for clarifying!

I am not disagreeing with what you say, but "charged" as it was used in the GP comment, it might have lead someone to believe that VULTR charge for usage per month.

Looks like it is abandoned; first commit was June and last September.

Yep, it is insane if you only had 1 $5 instance.

Maybe a bug in their billing software or something...

> you will be automatically charged 500% of your regular usage

You are not being "charged" per se. The amount is transferred to your account and is there as credit until you spend it.

Sorry for nitpicking, but it is important point.

How many instances did you have at the time you received the email?

Usually, when I receive an email like this, the amount is equal to the monthly bill of the instances I have active at the moment.

> Is there such thing as right and wrong?

Yes.

> And if so, how does one know what is right and what is wrong?

It all boils down to life and death. Right is anything that promotes life, wrong is anything that brings death.

This usually translates to right being anything that brings pleasure, while wrong anything that causes pain. After all that's how the brain is wired.

On the other hand we are social creatures and sometimes there is conflict, something that is right for the individual maybe is wrong for the community. It is widely accepted that right of the many is greater than the right of the one, and hence we have the laws.

So yes, there is right and wrong, and they are very clearly defined.

The problem that the OP has, is that most individuals in his country do what is right for themselves but wrong for the many and hence OP feels like a sucker because she/he does what is wrong for herself/himself but right for the many.

But if we go back to the roots of right and wrong, if most of the people in the community choose to do the wrong thing, then doing the right thing is not doing the right thing anymore.

Confused? Let me give you an example. Let's say we have 10 persons locked in a room. Each day we give a stick of bread to a random person. The community has decided that every day they will share the bread among all of them, as it is the best for the community(nobody will die of starvation). In this case, when you get the bread it is very clear that the right thing to do is to share it.

Now what happens if the majority of the individuals in the room, don't do the right thing, and don't share the bread when they get it, but keep it for themselves?

If a person gets the bread is it right to keep it to herself/himself or to share it?

Surprisingly the right thing to do, both for the individual and for the community, is to keep it, as the community will not really benefit if that person starves to death.

Of course, something even better would be for that person to try to convince everybody to start sharing the bread again.

Yeah, the recent news are really worrying. You should switch to your own domain and a different provider for any email that you care about.

> That being said, I think tech journalism overstates the amount of control which either Google and Facebook can actually exert over their users.

That's how they win, by being underestimated. Better to overestimate IMHO.

Call me a Cassandra, but I won't be surprised in the next POTUS is Zuck.

The sad part is that people were warning about FB years before that only to be mocked.

Pretty much the same way people are warning about Google today but get ignored.

Pleas stop using FB and restrict the amount of Google services you use.

Time for ToR/VPN

https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-setu...

Ooops. Thanks :D

Try "Little snitch", apart from sublime, it is the best $40 I ever spent.

Edit: the best $40..

> Apparently, prime time came and went :)

:D. Pun was not intended!

The syntax is closer to Haskell than Ocaml.

Foe example types in Ocaml usually start with lower letter.

Also Elm has "Maybe", just like Haskell, instead of "option" of Ocaml.

Also in Elm, like in Haskell you would write "List Sometype", while in Ocaml it is "sometype list".

> it would sound like there was some critical change to the core functionality of the language

No, I acknowledged early on, and many times, that it is a very minor thing. My only concern is that it is worrying for the future. (Using the word huge in the "huge red flag" was an exaggeration. I shouldn't have done so).

> 1. It confuses newbies.

Remove it from core language then. Having the prime character in my code, doesn't confuse anyone but me.

Is a language that allows Unicode characters for variable names confusing for newbies?

> 2. It's an easy character to miss.

Again, it is in my code.

> 3. It's easy to migrate away from it.

That's not an argument for removing something.

Again, my point is that is has to do with personal taste, yet Evan decided to force it to anybody who uses the language.

He could have very easily enforce it to core packages, and nobody would complain. But forcing it on my code, is worrying.

See my reply to the other thread.

1. If it is not ready for prime time, maybe we should stop promoting it?

2. React was 0.14 up to a year or so ago. The number doesn't mean anything.

> early stage language

I keep hearing this excuse, and to be honest I don't like it. On one hand we want to expand the usage of Elm, and have Elm be taken seriously, on the other hand when we feel like we use the "early stage" language excuse.

> I'd say reducing weird syntax is a perfectly good reason

I disagree with you on this, prohibiting the users from using the prime character has nothing to do with the language's syntax.

Haskell