> My personal take on this subject is that Rust turns experts back into beginners and some devs react with hatred because of the fear this induces.
Those people are probably poor devs. Anyone who doesn't have the attitude and mindset to continue learning in something like software development which keeps advancing isn't cut out for that field.
Maybe it wouldn't be reasonable to say this about people who dislike programming in Malbolge, and maybe there are aspects of Rust that are more like programming in Malbolge and less like the field advancing.
I think you're right. The same way people have strong preference for Systemd, MacOS, KDE, Gnome, I3, Nix, Debian, Gentoo, Arch, etc.
So many different solutions. Most are preferred because of subjective reasons (although sometimes just poor reasoning period), because people think so drastically differently.
It's still amazing there is just no all in one solution for viewing and sharing media between people. Having to hook Sonarr/radarr whatever into something to track indexers than a client then some kind of all in one interface that might not even be a media player....
I don't know that this is the right way to solve the resume 'problem' - I think LaTeX is a far superior choice, yet the author pretty much dimissed it as a possibility.
For me personally, I found LaTeX to be the perfect solution. I have my resume tex setup so I can set toggles to define what gets output. E.g. applying for a manager position, I might keep it brief and more technical.
The resume is modular and can be updated by updating external txt files and not the LaTeX itself. It looks nice, is always consistent, has nice links, etc.
It's optimized for all the ATS nonsense it inevitably gets run through, it generates a PDF, and I've made it near impossible for recruiters to copy and paste and repurpose it without retyping much of it, and I have a tone of tech tricks in their like invisible text that automated systems might see.
If LaTeX itself is sufficient, I can't imagine needing to add in something like Nix and a webserver or how that would be better in any way.
LaTeX is fine to me, as well. Heck, now that I'm older, I think bare TeX is probably fine. In line with what you are saying, I can offload the semantic nature of my resume to text files and just use the markup of TeX to layout how I want the page to look. Much easier if I don't try and have a single source that is both all of my semantic data with the layout at the same time.
I store the customizable data in YAML format and then use mako templates + a python script to transform my custom resume- and cover letter data into Latex | HTML | Plain text
> I think LaTeX is a far superior choice, yet the author pretty much dimissed it as a possibility.
Learning curve is a thing: I've never touched LaTeX, and I don't anticipate using it in the future. If I wanted to automate a thing as a learning project, I probably would rule out LaTeX unless I had a reason to want to learn it.
I’ve actually made the switch over to Typst[0] for my app [1]. I’ve previously used a quick jinja .tex template that then just pasted things in, but LaTeX can really throw some strange errors and overall handling the files was a hassle.
Typst was much easier to setup and the function-based operation meant that sending variables in was a breeze with better error handling there too. Also, I just grok the syntax a lot better.
Just another option for folks looking to redo their resumes/not use Latex.
It took me something like 20min to learn the very basics of Typst and generate a PDF of my resume from my machine (Typst is distributed as a single binary). Definitely a lot easier to work with than LaTeX.
I used this package [1] (see also the index [2] for more packages / templates).
Nix is completely orthogonal to whatever tech you use to build the resume - it's nice as a build tool + to provide dev environments for however you're going to realize your resume.
Nix ≠ NixOS. Nix is a build tool (like make or Ninja or Bazel) with strict isolation of builds and caching of artifacts. NixOS is a distro built on top of that tool, like the BSDs are built on top of make, Gentoo on top of Portage, or gittup[1] on top of tup. Running NixOS while you’re building your resume is irrelevant; using Nix to create the final artifacts is a material statement about the chosen toolset.
I have used LaTeX extensively over the years until Typst came along. Typst is exactly what I need. A lightweight syntax alternative of LaTeX without the issues. It supports SVGs and many more things that are very useful.
I would be careful with LaTeX. I use to have a LaTeX resume generated with LuaTeX. At an old company, I saw my LaTeX resume in the ATS long after I was hired. Apparently, something happened and the PDF displayed as blurred-but-not-unreadable in the ATS. Maybe the ATS did some post-processing or used a limited PDF display engine? Lucky for me, the resume for that job was just a formality. These days, I just use Google Docs and export to PDF.
I don’t know of the example systems but I’ve applied to a handful of companies recently, all running the same-ish workday resume ingestion. You can actually tell which are running a more recent version because the parsing is more accurate.
There is also a common no-account single page application software, I checked at a company I’d applied to and it was called Lever(?)
Normally, I thought for ATS parsing if you upload in an application and a few of the prior experience text boxes are accurate, then you’re good. I’ve always had to fix my experiences though, even with using a word doc.
I have yet to see a really good LaTeX CV. I guess it is possible but in my experience LaTeX just isn't designed for that and gives boring-looking results.
I have yet to see an impressive resume from someone that wasn't boring in layout. Worse, I have seen very few resumes that were not boring in looks that were attached to a good candidate. :(
> I have seen very few resumes that were not boring in looks that were attached to a good candidate
I have seen many. You might be misinterpreting "boring". I don't mean that CVs should be like a Flash website. I mean they should look good typographically and not just like an instruction manual for a washing machine.
I'm somewhat cheating in what I mean here, though. I was thinking of stuff like https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/vita.html, where his CV is so basic in layout that it is kind of shocking. If I remember the CV of most high level faculty I got the chance to look at, none of them were that concerned with columns or typeface. They were, simply, lists of data.
It's a bit different in academia, especially if you are Donald Knuth! When do you think was the last time he sent a CV to a company looking for a job? The 60s?
I agree that most LaTeX CVs are kind of boring. But I think they are more interesting than the end product in TFA, which I found completely underwhelming.
Now I have spent quite a lot of time customizing LaTeX, to the point where people have come to ask how I produced certain documents, because it surely could not be LaTeX. If you have a specific design idea in your head, LaTeX is able to achieve it if you just spend enough time RTFMing.
LaTeX is a nightmare to use, so you shouldn't inflict it on people. While I've used it and there's a lot to like, there's very little there that you'd want or need to make a resume. And without those things (most notably good formula support), it just doesn't add enough to justify the pain of having it in your life.
My resume is in LaTeX, but I like using a nix Flake so I can easily run `nix build` to build the resume, and I've guaranteeably installed the correct version of texlive that I need cuz it's reproducible.
Nix obviously isn't strictly necessary, but making a flake wasn't terribly hard and it's nice to keep stuff standardized between distros and macos.
> It's optimized for all the ATS nonsense it inevitably gets run through
How did you do/test that? I help maintain (didn't author it originally) the AwesomeCV template; we have an open issue about this, inconsistent results and not really having a good way to test it.
I've never tried LaTeX, but I've built my last few resumes with plain old HTML+CSS then saving as PDF. Works pretty great and is insanely simple to upkeep/modify
> Google is an ad company so it's totally not obvious to me.
Google being an ad company is irrelevant here. I wasn't clear in my wording, I should have said 'Android as a platform' and not Google, is the only choice, and it is.
Sure, there are disadvantages and it's not perfect, but it doesn't matter. If you care about privacy, using something like Graphene or eOS on a Fairphone is your best option.
> Oh, and can I pay with my phone when using those custom roms, for example?
The demand isn't there for that. Help change that and be the change you want to see in the world.
If trying to get enough public support to push for structural change is the idea, then iOS is currently moving toward being less locked down, while Android has been getting more locked down.
Help change that by supporting open platforms over closed platforms. It's that simple. Put your money towards fairphones and pinephones and not iphones.
I will put up with a certain amount of jank to support better platforms, but those two in particular are a mess and the fairphone is still stuck on qualcomm.
Android is the better choice not due to Android specifically, but rather due to Android as a platform which includes the hardware that the Android OS can run on, and all the forks of Android.
> Selling your product in the EU means having an EU presence.
Ehhhhhh. Kind of. Maybe. Certainly not always.
I mean, if there is some shitty little porn company in say, California, and they make porn that say, caters to a fetish that is legal in California but illegal in the EU, well, what then?
The porn company isn't doing anything wrong, and EU laws are irrelevant. At this point they can try to firewall off the company, punish ISPs, maybe punish citizens who do business with that company, because it isn't breaking any EU laws, and has no EU presence that can be fined, sieved, etc.
This is very normal, this is the way international laws work barring treaties or other agreements to have a special arrangement outside of that.
So, if Apple pulls out of the EU, maybe they can no longer ship mail to the EU, I'm doubtful of that but let's just say. Well, there are plenty of non EU countries close by, including the UK. Not really a problem for EU citizens to get one at all, so again, the EU can only punish people, not the company.
> Like, I can’t just ship heroin to Europe from abroad and claim I’m immune.
If it was legal to do so in the sending country, sure you could. That isn't true for any country though, so it's not a great analogy.
> So, if Apple pulls out of the EU, maybe they can no longer ship mail to the EU, I'm doubtful of that but let's just say.
Why? Apple has Customs pulling (ironically, actually genuine) Apple parts being shipped.
Customs is built around this whole model, unless what, you propose that Apple starts selling commercial quantities of iPhones by disposable drop shippers?
Excellent point, I clearly wasn't thinking too clearly when I made that point. The main point I was thinking is that trying to stop iPhones coming in to the EU is significantly harder.
Imagine the amount of people wanking through the 'nothing to declare' exit after coming back from pretty much any other country and buying an iphone.
The EU could start blocking payments to that porn studio. Avoiding the block would be money laundering, which is also illegal in California. The EU (or it's constituent countries - not sure) also controls imports, and could seize and destroy illegally purchased iPhones at the border. Every one of my international purchases is already stopped and processed by customs to evaluate import taxes. It would be quite easy for them to simply say "you can't import this."
> The EU could start blocking payments to that porn studio.
Sure, but this is not punishing the company in any way which was the other posters point. If the EU was blocking payments to Apple after Apple withdrew from the EU, they are not punishing Apple or holding them accountable to EU law (specifically in the context of complying with competition guidelines and DMA type stuff).
> Avoiding the block would be money laundering, which is also illegal in California.
Hmmmm. I'm not so sure about that. If the EU barred payments to Apple, that block would be on banks and payment processors, not people. If someone goes to the US and buys an iPhone in this new world, they are not committing a crime unless the EU passes a law prohibiting its citizens to buy iPhones.
> The EU (or it's constituent countries - not sure) also controls imports, and could seize and destroy illegally purchased iPhones at the border. Every one of my international purchases is already stopped and processed by customs to evaluate import taxes. It would be quite easy for them to simply say "you can't import this."
Absolutely, but this has nothing to do with Apple, and it isn't the EU punishing Apple, it's Apple punishing people or organizations.
The other posters point was that if Apple withdraws from the EU, EU law wouldn't apply (in the sense they wouldn't need to allow any 3rd party app store, period), and people could still buy iPhones and Apple products outside of it. It's on the EU to try and deal with that.
So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?
> Or bypass
How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…
> Re-read the comment in context.
It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale. It just wouldn’t work due to perfectly obvious reasons.
> So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?
If EU fines exceed EU revenue.
> How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…
The EU would have to police its own citizens from going outsize their walls and buying iPhones from literally any other country.
> It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale.
So it made sense, and you understood fine, you just disagreed and decided to be obtuse about it. Sigh.
The point was simply that the EU can't touch a company in another country with no presence in the EU, even if EU citizens are buying from it.
All they can do is try and block payments to it, firewall it off, and similar things.
So sure, the EU could police its citizens buying iPhones online, but that's going to be an awful lot of work considering all the third party sellers, and I don't think it would be terribly successful. Not without enforcement which would be extremely unpopular.
They won’t. Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulant, because if not it should be “if the cost of compliance with EU regulations exceeds their EU revenue/net income” which isn’t going to be even remotely true.
> obtuse about it
Not at all. It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:
A very small fraction of people
buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.
So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything
You're awfully cocksure with nothing to back it up.
Apple's global revenue in 2023 was about 120 billion. EU revenue was 24 billion. DMA allows fines up to 10% of global revenue. Two max fines under the DMA is already more than their EU profit.
> Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulantv
I'm not the one making an assumption here. I'm saying if x then y which is perfectly reasonable. You're saying x would *NEVER* happen, which I would consider foolish.
I think Apple will comply with the EU to a point, I agree they are not trying to leave the EU at all. But ultimately they are still a US company and follow US leadership, who may want to do things or try and circumvent EU policies in a way they think are fine, but the EU doesn't.
I mean, there was already a clash with their first fine, it won't be surprising if more come.
I also really think you are being dismissive and downplaying their decision to not enter the AI market in the EU.
> It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:
> A very small fraction of people buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.
> So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything
I'm so confused at what point you are making here. You're saying EU citizens, if Apple left the EU, would just, and to quote "ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support."
Is this correct? Because that has been specifically the point I was making. Jesus. My point though, to clarify again, is if they do that, Apple won't be subject to any EU rules. All those iPhones bought outside the EU won't have 3rd party app stores, for example, and the EU would be powerless to enforce that. Seriously. That's the point I made several comments ago that you decided to dispute. Which now you are making yourself?
Sure, like let's not be silly and absurd and refuse to consider the possibility Apple might leave the EU?
> Also it’s the cost of compliance that has to surpass their profit
Right, but the fines the EU issues are from their global revenue. While I think this is reasonable, for the same reasons it's a problem that the rich can speed and not care about a fine, but it could well be enough for Apple to withdraw.
It’s a rough not very educated estimate of what proportion of their global revenue Apple might lose by complying with the regulations ( I’d personally bet it’s significantly less than that). Do you have a better figure?
Once again, you're just making assumptions. So, all this time you've just assuming the max fines won't apply - that's the entire crux of your argument, right?
As where I've been talking about a situation where the max fines are being imposed.
I really don't think you're reading or keeping the context of the discussion in mind when replying. I have no other explanation for you assuming 2% and asking if I have a better figure in spite of me specifically citing the max fine number as a prerequisite for my scenario numerous times.
No, it’s still a problem for apple because they won’t leave. Even in the absurdly inconceivable (to an extent that it’s not even worth discussing) case that they did losing a significant proportion of their revenue would be a much bigger problem for them than the EU.
Less than 20% of Apple’s net income comes from what they call “Europe”, which actually includes Africa and the mid-East.
If Apple pulled out of the EU, which isn’t even all of the European continent much less the “Europe” reporting region, they would probably take less than a 10% hit. Significant, but not a showstopper. I don’t know where everyone gets this idea that pulling out of the EU would kill Apple.
It wouldn’t. It would still be an immensely absurd thing to do. I assume Apple is not run by 12-year olds, why would they lose 15-20% (probably closer to 20%, EMEA seems to be ~27% and besides Britain the EU would be the overwhelming majority of what’s left) of their revenue out of spite when realistically they are only risking 1-2% by staying?
They are just trying to find the “optimal” way of complying with the regulations while maximizing their income.
> So the free to play model fleeces you for more money. It's not predatory. At all. Honest.
Ah, I see the cause of the misunderstanding. You're assuming the free to play model fleeces people for more money always when that simply isn't true. It's obviously true when companies are playing dirty, but not all companies do. Consider little indie studios, for example.
Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so.
The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once?
> Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so.
Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid.
And the game design and development effort went towards making those hats so the whales can buy them.
Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game.
> The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once?
Why are you going out of your way to disingenuously interpret comments? It's strangely super-defensive, your comment history shows it isn't a rare occurrence.
No, maybe not the little indie studios you specifically buy your games from, but plenty of indie studios offer free to play games.
Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please.
> Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid.
Because they probably had disposable income and wanted to. It doesn't mean they are being fleeced, anymore than Balanciaga is 'fleecing' people here.
I take 'fleecing' here to mean conning, and there is no con happening. It's an honest transaction that people can take if they want to.
> Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game.
No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make.
> Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please.
I don't look at free games, I'm not that rich.
> No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make.
But they are. And not only for the whales that pay 2000 for the hats.
Do you realize that any "free" title is designed to waste your time to keep you playing? Why do you think they are all endless $ACTIVITY or competitive multiplayer? Is your time worth that little?
Jesus christ lol. So, you're just confirming here you had no clue what you were talking about. You get that, right?
You're making very bold claims based on assumptions and misunderstanding, for something you don't even browser or participate in. Your initials aren't DK by any chance, are they?
> And not only for the whales that pay 2000 for the hats.
Sure, anyone that can afford it and wants it will. Most people might just pay for a few $20 hats though, and get more enjoyment out of it than say 3 of their $8 cups of coffee.
> Do you realize that any "free" title is designed to waste your time to keep you playing?
I mean, that'ss true in some cases, and I'd say that's true of the biggest free to play games pushed by the buggest companies with a history of being shady, but again (and this is key): that doesn't describe all free to play games.
You're doing the equivilant of insisting all operating systems must be unstable and crash because Windows used to.
> Why do you think they are all endless $ACTIVITY or competitive multiplayer? Is your time worth that little?
I play free to play games to jump on and have a break. I'v played FPS games since I was a kid and find it a good way to destress. I see no problem in doing something I enjoy and would hardly call that a waste of time.
Those people are probably poor devs. Anyone who doesn't have the attitude and mindset to continue learning in something like software development which keeps advancing isn't cut out for that field.