Unfortunately, the post mostly covers the lack of monotonicity in UUID <= 5 and only acknowledges at its end and only briefly that both UUID and GUID actually have versions that solve for exactly that. Leaving us with the post’s other, unexplored, complaint that UUIDs and GUIDs are "huge" and "take up a lot of space". Any good writing out there on considerations vis-a-vis PK column size in current RDBMs or monotonic UUID versions 6-8 as PKs?

Even v1 can be sorted if the database is remotely smart about it - Cassandra clusters v1 UUID that are part of a clustering key (and partition keys if the ordered partitioner is used) by sorting on the time components first (and in an upcoming version by reordering the internal representation)

Since it’s less useful for Cassandra (as those conditions won’t be met in most cases), I hope other databases with more to gain have also thought to implement this when they offered UUID types.

You’re on the right track, the immediate value of the email addresses is near nil. Instead consider these email addresses are highly self-targeted due to the nature of the sign up. That can then be sold for direct use, for resale, or most likely for inclusion in larger data sets that aggregate tracking information about individuals for ad targeting and browsing/results personalization. For example, consider the value to Amazon to be able to match this expressed interest with the email address of my Prime account; they could then push SQL-related content on my Amazon front-page with justifiable confidence I’d buy something vs the default of showing me canned kidney beans. Of course, that they show me canned kidney beans _because_ I just bought an SSD does show how this is mostly pie in the sky/skynet nonsense.

If you change your mind, it shouldn’t be hard to handle the taxes; I think the approach would be the same as for hobby income.

If you’re in the US and filing taxes as a employee I think you’d just sum up the book sales and stick that under Other Income. If you’re already filing as a business or self employed, just roll it in no? Of course, other countries are available.

Anyway, I’d happily pay a few bucks at the very least for this. If it’s useful, it’s going to help my own income. If I see people who maybe can’t afford a few bucks can get it for free, I’ll be even happier to pay.

The problem is not unknown value. It’s unknown cost. Until I know everything you will ever do to me with my email I don’t know the true cost. What I can guess—given the thousands of precedents I’ve encountered over the years—is that the total cost will be time taken from my short life to fend of yet more marketing and yet more marketers. For comparison, if you ask me for currency, I know the total cost of ownership. Usually, for me, a few units of currency are a rounding error compared to the value I place on time.

The total cost is how much time it takes to google "temp email" and then click on the first link and use that temp email to get the book. It should take about 2 minutes, maybe even less time than writing out your comment.

Sure, same as the total cost of a movie is how long it takes to type the name into a torrent search and click the magnet link. If the OP wanted a bunch of dead temp emails, why ask other people to input them. But, not my point.

I think on HN a good assumption is posters want to discuss, to get feedback. Also not a bad assumption the notion of temp email will be news to absolutely no one at all here.

The reasons people choose to develop PWA or native have greater impacts on the user experience than the differences between the two.

For example, many predict PWA development will be cheaper for them in the short-term. They are first optimizing product development for short-term cost. That focus impacts the released product more than PWA’s strengths and weaknesses. Others choose PWA hoping for a way to rapidly release and iterate MVPs of experimental business ideas. Again, the rationale has a greater impact on the user experience than the tech. Some expect native stacks will let them more deeply tune and polish the user experience than PWA. Or access richer or more performant device capabilities that PWAs cannot. And, this focus on experience over cost impacts the users’ experiences more than the capabilities of native.

In short, many PWAs feel poorer because of product development goals and constraints that precede PWA. These products were always going to give a poorer experience, regardless of the choice of PWA or native.

> For example, many predict PWA development will be cheaper for them in the short-term.

It's objectively true if your requirements include multi platform support (particularly web) and don't have hard native requirements (such as device Bluetooth access).

> Others choose PWA hoping for a way to rapidly release and iterate MVPs of experimental business ideas. Again, the rationale has a greater impact on the user experience than the tech.

This isn't always true.

Expedience, familiarity, or new and shiny are very strong gravity sources in making a decision.

The design skill of the team and org will have a bigger impact on the final product than the decision. Crappy native apps are as bad as crappy web apps. And there are tons of crappy native apps. Exceptional software is a relatively rare breed of software.

That said, I will grant that some organizations will have a rushing about management style that can pretty much only build short sighted crap and if given the choice they would probably opt for a PWA. Even as I repeat this logical seeming rational I have worked at such places and they haven't built PWAs, so it's not some universal. They still fell into one of the above gravity sources.

Note that TOTP is not limited to a single authenticator. You can, for example, scan the same TOTP setup QR code once with an app on your phone and again with a different app on your laptop (or scan in one and paste the code in the other).

I use this approach with Yubico Authenticator, which stores its data on Yubikeys, so I have all 2FAs on at least two keys even with TOTP-only services that seemingly allow only one authenticator per account, e.g., AWS.

Thanks for sharing that, I did not know it.

You can also screenshot the barcode and use it years later if necessary.

SEEKING WORK + SEEKING FREELANCER | Remote in zones from Melbourne to Berlin

* Software product development: mobile + desktop + service * Maximize return and minimize risk * Two-person team working together since the nineties.

We specialize in developing rough ideas into light and flexible software products. We can maintain and extend those products with you. Or help you build a team that will.

We choose technologies that fit the product and fit you. Technologies you can build profits and teams around.

We are https://sensedata.com

Call or Signal us: Yuri +1 720 515 5190 and Matt +1 303 886 4337

* Recognize yourself above? Design functional and beautiful human-computer interactions? Or implement lean, provable code? We’ve things to make, people to help. Reach out.

TLDR; the author thinks outsourcing that attempts to increase ROI by leveraging international income disparities to minimize labor costs doesn't work because providers of such work want to earn as much as money as possible for their own businesses.

My thought/question for the author would be: how then can companies that work together do so without operating as charities, or are all businesses in relationships deluding themselves? Should everything be brought in-house, for example, house building? Is there a line, or a particular type of outsourcing that works or that doesn't? (Executive management, sewing employees' clothing, trimming their neckbeards?)

I think it's fairer to say the author thinks outsourcing fails because interests are not aligned. The client benefits from a successful, well-designed and efficient code base. The outsourcing company benefits from billing more time to clients that pay a lot on time.

I don't think this is an overseas thing. This is an in-house vs hired gun question.

For the "Anymore" part of the authors title to be logical, the points in his article about decreases in income disparity over time must be considered an integral part of his argument, i.e., before the disparities were reduced, outsourcing (according to him) worked.

Regardless, the question about how other businesses can be successful in their relationships if his argument were to hold water still stands—every business relationship involves imperfectly aligned interests.

By the way, a client benefits from positive return on investment. A client who loses money and receives a well-designed and efficient code base does not, i.e., the codebase is merely one component with variable traits that must be adjusted properly for each scenario.

You're correct. It's just that our field is not in a good state with gender equality at moment, so some consideration beyond the literal meanings found in dictionaries is often worth the tiny effort. See: "to add insult to injury."