This isn't happening on Google Maps though is it? We're just talking about Apple Maps here.

I don't necessarily like the idea of a company wiping their hands clean and saying "well - not our problem!" either though.

Companies shouldn't wait to solve issues like this - they should be proactively helping their most vulnerable users. That is the "do no evil" motto.

I don't know enough to say whether this method is the right approach however.

Saying that computer/OS manufacturers should prevent malware is effectively equivalent to saying that they should not sell general purpose computers to the public. A general purpose computer is one that can run any program the users tells it to, which necessarily includes one that's malicious.

That doesn't necessarily preclude helping the user to notice when they're doing something dangerous, but a waiting period before the computer becomes general-purpose seems pretty extreme.

The general consumer does not care about the distinction of if a product is technically a "general purpose computer" or not. They care about if the device is able to do what they want from it, providing them value.

> Saying that computer/OS manufacturers should prevent malware is effectively equivalent to saying that they should not sell general purpose computers to the public.

(in Gilbert Huph (Wallace Shawn) voice) Yes, precisely!

>Companies shouldn't wait to solve issues like this

Unless you built your house yourself, you should expect the construction company to be responsible for verifying the identities of anyone entering your house. Asking for a passport and a one time payment, just in case the person who rings the bell may not be a friend.

That should be proactively helping you in case you're a vulnerable homeowner. Not checking in on every visitor would be evil, no?

I can't think of a better approach.

I lived in an apartment building, and one of the upsides was that the building had a security system and a front desk that helped control who could be wandering down my hall.

Me too.

But we, owners, collectively choose that. We choose the security company, we pay then, we can vote them out. Most importantly: the construction company has zero say in this.

Also, no one actually check the IDs of my friends, and they don't have to pay the construction company when they first come.

I give the codes, they ring, I open. I hire a company to monitor the building but I can kick then out any day.

I own the place, you see?

Doesn't really seem like it fits the analogy. Even ignoring that, I doubt they were checking passports and collecting tolls from guests, right?

> Companies shouldn't wait to solve issues like this - they should be proactively helping their most vulnerable users.

I think they should help their median users and empower their power users, and they should absolutely throw a few "most vulnerable" users under the bus if that's necessary. Otherwise you think about banning kitchen knives to protect the "most vulnerable users" who are too stupid to handle a knife. No, we shouldn't do that. Their stupidity should be their problem, not our problem.

Some degree of collateral damage must be accepted to maximize the expected value of a product or service. Minimizing risks can't be the top priority. Don't ban kitchen knives. What you are effectively arguing for is transforming both Windows and macOS into a closed iOS. Don't do that.

I think it's more about how using "most" as a measurement, no matter who the audience is that you pool from, is not a good way of producing a valuable list. In the end, having someone learned and well read produce a hand-written list with deeper cuts brings more value.

He is definitely "online". I saw him tweet about Hasan's dog which - you have to know about streaming political figures and the latest happenings at least a little bit. Maybe not addicted but he knows what is up and still has the views he has.

I wonder how people are able to stay functional while being online. I'm in 2 states. (1) Very productive and joyful. (2) Extreme dysfunctional and commenting on HN and Reddit.

What industry do you work in? Modern RAII practices are pretty prevalent

This is common in embedded systems, where there is limited memory and no OS to run garbage collection.

Garbage collection in C++?

What does RAII have to do with any of the above?

0 allocations after the program initializes.

RAII doesn't imply allocating.

My guess is that you're assuming all user defined types, and maybe even all non-trivial built-in types too, are boxed, meaning they're allocated on the heap when we create them.

That's not the case in C++ (the language in question here) and it's rarely the case in other modern languages because it has terrible performance qualities.

Open a file in the constructor, close it in the destructor. RAII with 0 allocations.

std::vector<int> allocated and freed on the stack will allocate an array for its int’s on the heap…

I've heard that MSVC does (did?) that, but if so that's an MSVC problem. gcc and clang don't do that.

https://godbolt.org/z/nasoWeq5M

WDYM? Vector is an abstraction over dynamically sized arrays so sure it does use heap to store its elements.

I think usefulcat interpreted "std::vector<int> allocated and freed on the stack" as creating a default std::vector<int> and then destroying it without pushing elements to it. That's what their godbolt link shows, at least, though to be fair MSVC seems to match the described GCC/Clang behavior these days.

Sure, but my point was that RAII doesn't need to involve the heap. Another example would be acquiring abd releasing a mutex.

RAII doesn't necessarily require allocation?

Stack "allocations" are basically free.

No. And they're unsafe. Avoid them at all costs.

Well if you're using the standard library then you're not really paying attention to allocations and deallocations for one. For instance, the use of std::string. So I guess I'm wondering if you work in an industry that avoids std?

I work in high-scale data infrastructure. It is common practice to do no memory allocation after bootstrap. Much of the standard library is still available despite this, though there are other reasons to not use the standard containers. For example, it is common to need containers that can be paged to storage across process boundaries.

C++ is designed to make this pretty easy.

Not an expert but I’m pretty sure no exceptions means you can’t use significant parts of std algorithm or the std containers.

And if you’re using pooling I think RAII gets significantly trickier to do.

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/freestanding.html to see the parts you can use.

And what does "modern" has to do with it anyway.

I wish this was one of HN's auto formatting rules, automatically replace the link with one of these frontends

Tbh I think it's ok - as much as I also want to avoid Twitter I do encourage original sourcing, especially since these nitter services can also have downtime fairly often. As long as someone jumps in and shares a link

This seems problematic to me. Beyond just caching issues, did you ever get permission from users to store their personal data? They gave google permission, but not you.

The users are going through an OAuth flow and creating an account. Presumably they are agreeing to a ToS as part of that.

It even says in the OAuth flow that the company is requesting your profile image.

It's a public photo. What's wrong with downloading it?

Folks, read yourself some GDPR for the greater good. Even just https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

Public data can be personal data and anyone doing the same as TFA is making itself a liable processor. But, aren't you a processor by using OAuth in the first place? Yes but with what TFA is doing you have a greater liability surface.

(IANAL but I cite GDPR because the broad concepts apply to data privacy laws in other jurisdictions. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect)

I don't live in Europe, I will never travel to Europe, I don't plan to ever do business with Europe. I don't care if Europe sentences me to be shot into the sun for GDPR violations, it's not like I'm going to be extradited for it.

And I'm not aware of any law anywhere here that says I can't download a public photo. The use case is clearly valid and benign, the photo is public, there's no way a judge would go for that no matter how you twist the law.

Yes! Recently came across a profilic Neovim plugin developer who used their phone for development:

https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1hay1z3/develo...

Meanwhile, i struggle to be efficient on my 13 inch screen

Yes. I'm not for calling out individual people, those who probably had hope and some may be young and didn't have the warning flags going off. I can only imagine they're disappointed and had no malice.

But people who have some level of fame who put their name behind it, and who had some influence in inspiring others down this wrong path most definitely need to address it. If you truly believe the intelligence of tech people over others in every field which led you down this path, follow the proper postmortem process.

It is absolutely not all major employers. I'm on a visa and have worked for two major tech companies in the US over the last 10 years. I have never been a contractor. I've also compared salaries and know I am doing comparable or better. The majority of my team have always been naturalized citizens.