It's worse than that. They don't even offer a monthly subscription contract - it's purely annual, but they advertise and promote monthly with fine print.
Yes they do, but they hide it. On the plans page,[0] if you click "see all plans", a true monthly subscription option appears. But the prices are unreasonably large to force you into the "annual, billed monthly" trick. For example, the full creative suite (Creative Cloud Pro) is $35 "a month" with the annual contract, or... $105 on a monthly contract!
They've always billed monthly, but the thing they got in trouble for was that it was attached to a 1-year commit where customers were getting hit with early termination fees pro-rated to the rest of the contract. If they did offer this it was hidden deep in the sign-up flow enough that they lost a lawsuit over it.
I imagine both states would end up with single-payer healthcare pretty quickly, and both already have GDP greater than all but 3 EU countries... what exactly would the EU bring to the table?
There are a few bad examples like Halo, Black Flag, and Oblivion but overall I think remakes/remasters over the last several years have been pretty good. Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Dead Space, Persona, Final Fantasy Tactics, Gothic, Super Mario/Paper Mario, and Tomb Raider all come to mind.
Regardless, IP holders should have the rights to distribution and while you may disagree with that it's still a legal protection they get to enjoy under our legal system.
And these VBA macros in excel probably don't have any more bugs and issues than all the software written by the HN community. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
This doesn't make any sense. I regularly use Windows for a few things, and do not have this problem. Sane corp group policies disable all the annoying things folks complain about on the default consumer install, and there are few things you can't do just using a keyboard and keybindings.
I still prefer Linux and KDE is my daily driver but most of the comments I read here about Windows seem to be people regurgitating second-hand comments they read and passing them off as their own, and it's always the same small list of things every time.
You say that Windows is fine if you have a whole IT department taking on the burden of fighting against the annoyances, but then accuse people who complain about those annoyances of regurgitating second-hand complaints!?
I just re-installed recently for gaming partition. Some of the things I need to disable are annoying, but yes they're still fine.
> fighting against the annoyances
Because they're trivial annoyances. I spend just as much time disabling or changing annoying things on KDE (or MacOS), I don't see the difference other than "Microsoft bad!" At the end of the day the same amount of my time is wasted. I'll save my moral outrage for actually important things.
Yea... My experience is Windows is usually a more out-of-the-way OS than Linux distros I've used. On Linux I fight the permissions system and routine hardware/software setup can break parts of the OS and I end up troubleshooting on forums.
Linux to me feels like it's designed for multi-user systems and servers, where I use it as a single person to launch software.
I think OP is just alluding to the fact that Postgres needs to do less work to go from secondary index to table data, since the tid is a direct pointer to the exact page and slotted entry while MySQL needs a b-tree walk.
> primary key index will be mostly cached so the cost of the indirection is much smaller than it may first appear
Not sure I follow. If it's in-memory you save having to read from disk, but you still have to walk the b-tree to go from PK to data.
> I think OP is just alluding to the fact that Postgres needs to do less work to go from secondary index to table data, since the tid is a direct pointer to the exact page and slotted entry while MySQL needs a b-tree walk.
Yes, this is true, but they framed this as "the Postgres approach is better when you have a good schema design", but that's not true. There are plenty of ways the MySQL approach is better even when you have a really good schema.
> Not sure I follow. If it's in-memory you save having to read from disk, but you still have to walk the b-tree to go from PK to data.
The point I was trying to make is that going to disk is going to be orders of magnitude slower than doing an in-memory B-tree traversal. Because of that, the cost of doing an extra b-tree traversal to find the page you're looking for is a relatively small cost compared to reading the page in the first place
MySQL was generally (pre 8) optimized for point queries on primary keys. So rows are stored in the PK index, the PK index is a clustered index. Everything more or less falls out of this.
Sure, I'm only taking about innodb. The join strategies supported before 8.0 (5.7 and lower) were basically nested loop and that's it. Which only really works well for a couple of query patterns: point queries with a handful of joined tables all using indexed FKs, or a big sorted scan over one single table and everything joined to it, with pagination through where clause and sorting all on the primary key, and possibly a straight_join to make sure it doesn't start the execution plan anywhere other than the spine table.
> only really works well for a couple of query patterns
To be fair this probably covered probably 9x% of production queries, like high-selectivity index-covered filters and sorts (with a limit). Even today most planners will still use an inner loop.
It's been interesting to watch how different planners have evolved over the years. SQL Server 7 in 1998 launched with features that MySQL and Postgres wouldn't catch up to until the late 2010s, but they had other features and quality-of-life improvements that made these edge-case optimizations hardly noticable.
Yes, the 4% of the Palestinian population they've killed is definitely not a form of expression. Like somehow killing only matters if you talk about how fun it is first.
For the record that's greater than the % of Bosniaks killed in the Bosnia genocide.
4% isn’t much in the grand scheme of things and again, yes you have to be able to prove the intent. Pretty basic legal principle. It could be 85% and that wouldn’t by itself prove genocide.
Do you guys even bother being minimally informed before commenting? Like, Wikipedia is right there…
You (and the contributors to that particular article) seem to not know the difference between war crimes (which Israel has probably committed) and genocide, which is much more onerous to prove. What you should be doing is looking at how genocide is defined generally and at how genocide cases have been prosecuted historically. Only by changing the goalposts of how genocide is defined can you attempt to construe what’s happening in gaza as genocide, which is what that article (which presupposes that what is happening in gaza is genocide by its title, obliterating any notion of objectivity) does throughout.
Put simply, if you use any legally accepted definition of genocide (as a matter of the historical record) then what is happening in gaza doesn’t even come close. And of course the legally accepted definition is ultimately all that matters. That’s very different from whether laymen think it’s genocide because what’s happening hurts their feelings.
Sorry, can you point me to the part where an Israeli military or political leader has expressed the view that all or some Palestinians should be murdered because they are Palestinians?
I missed that part when I looked, and for that I apologise.
"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
I said what Israel is doing is not genocide as that word is defined as a matter of law. Where the fuck did I say that what was happening in gaza is a good thing or 'okay'?
Sure if you ignore the UN Commission of Inquiry report from March 2025 that concluded sexual and gender-based violence was used systematically against Palestinian detainees.
Except Israel calls all criticism against it biased or anti semitic. Even a bad programmer can spot another bad programmer, sharing the trait doesn't mean you're not qualified to call it out in others.
I don't know, an example, Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese spreading nazi era conspiracy theories about Jews controlling political systems.
And that's from a human rights body, and from its representative to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
reply