Porsche was on the brink of bankruptcy. Then they started making SUVs. It turned out the SUVs are the ones that are bringing in all the cash to the company.
The audience of Porsche SUVs (cayenne, macan) care about signaling wealth via the badge. But they mostly want an everyday car for their commute, groceries / kid pickup.
No wonder the EVs options sell better. They have the badge, and are better at everyday tasks.
The 911 will stay gas powered (maybe e fuel at some point if mining of oil stops), because the target audience cares equally for signaling as well as the driving experience.
The EV options sell better in Europe because they completely stopped selling the ICE Macan due to EU cybersecurity regs. In North America (the only market that hasn't seen a decrease in sales), they did a 180 and promised to keep selling the ICE SUVs into 2030 because EV adoption has massively disappointed. The new K1 is now going to be sold with a combustion engine first instead of as a fully-electric.
Hmm this comment gives the impression that electric Porsches are bad to drive and are only bought for the badge and convenience, like the SUV:s. I haven't driven a Taycan so can't say but I would assume it's not so. (And also it doesn't look like a convenient car.)
I own a Panamera and my husband owns an M850i. The Panamera drives like a Porsche, while the M850i is comparatively a boat. I'm not a big fan of how much suspension travel the M850i has; the Panamera has exactly the right amount to feel sporty but still comfortable, just like our 718 has.
Car enthusiasts caring about the driving experience doesn't just mean drivability. Engine sound is a huge part of it. All the classic Porsche 911 have flat-6 engines which make a distinctive sound that is totally part of the brand.
FTR I don't care about this myself, I'm happy with my EV. But the importance of this aspect is easily missed by people not part of the target demographic.
It feels like engine sound has become more important to these people since EV's entered the market. I'm sure it was there before but not to the same extent.
The huge uproar about the 718 having a flat four turbo engine was mostly about the sound. (I don’t have a problem with it.) I think it has always been there.
It became more of a selling point as regulation came for it. OPF, stricter modification control, etc. Prior it didn't matter as much since it was always decent and you could do whatever you want to it. Now, a pops and bangs tune with a straight pipe will get your car impounded in most countries the first time a cop sees/hears you.
Also Porsche SUVs regularly rank at the top of luxury SUV reviews. I've never driven one but the consensus is that they're great - it's not just badge engineering.
The Cayenne has no right to be as fast as it is. The stupid thing will powerslide out of corners at 120 kmh and fly at hot hatch speeds through twisty cobblestone roads. The brakes were also wonderful and surprisingly cheap for the size. Didn't have air suspension so it rode like a fast car though.
Silly to assume no data crosses the boundary also considering how US is acting like trusting any US company is pretty silly as well.
If that orange clown stays in power it won’t belong before we are at war and then you will lose access to everything overnight and all your data is theirs
Yeah, kinda, but the moment it crosses the "war" threshold the pain rapidly escalates to things like "I hope you weren't using the Texas refineries, because half of them are now on fire".
It's not like Europe isn't looking at the effect Ukraine has been having on Russia and going "hmmm, interesting". Obviously I'm still over-simplifying, anything I'm aware of will have been war-gamed do death and back.
After tipping their hands too much over prosecuting and removing Joe Nacchio, the Qwest CEO who refused the NSA, I think that any company that does as much business with the federal government as Amazon or any telecom, gets pre-vetted.
Likely the first one will immediately fold to avoid jail.
But for context the head of the FED is currently investigated for criminal charges, governors, mayors, judges etc. Why is a CEO of a company so special? Within hours the board can appoint another one.
The one thing I’ve learned without it taking a stupid long time is that there’s no more things that are too ridiculous to imagine happening. The American regime is an irrational actor. They’ll do whatever.
Well I didn't say they wouldn't cooperate (very likely they would cave to any national security letter), I said there's no way they'd end up in jail. Politicians want their donations.
Yes let's talk about all the billionaire CEOs that get sent to prison.
Anyway, the entire structure and premise of this business is that they cannot do that. A court cannot put a CEO in jail just because partner businesses do not follow his orders. Do you think it is maybe remotely possible, that Amazons lawyers and architects understand this a little bit better than you do?
I'm thinking they checked it out, they checked it out a couple of times.
Edit/note: The main point AWS makes is indeed by whom/where this offering is operated. But, Microsoft stated that even though they made an environment so that the data lives entirely within the EU they may be compelled to transmit the data back.
This issue can be resolved on the European side by effectively making the transfer of EU->US data illegal and, if detected, nationalizing the entire EU subsidiary of the US company. Would this trigger a US-EU war? Certainly, but only the blind cannot see that relations are no longer those between two allies.
Not a lawyer but from what I understand the EU law makers are acting in response to US behavior. The US has laws intended to protect US citizens that do not apply to foreigners, a system where money buys access to anything and a lust for hoarding data. Meanwhile in the EU people use US tech for everything, probably for various not very good reasons. It's kinda sad really, it should have just been properly organized. US Tech companies should really have the customers and the EU the services.
> A court cannot put a CEO in jail just because partner businesses do not follow his orders.
In the US, rule of law does not matter any more in practice. That is the problem. You can't even say it's "rule by mob" - at least the mob had an honor codex, the current administration doesn't give a single flying fuck about anything any more. Might makes right.
I was hoping that 8k tvs at ~50inches would become widely available.
They were high enough density and tall enough for coding applications, but as first versions they had some rough edges (text rendering not great by default).
Instead they just disappeared from the market :(
I think Aliexpress has no brand panels, but at $600 it is a non trivial gamble.
I met regexes when I was 13, I think. I spent a little time reading the Java API docs on the language's regex implementation and played with a couple of regex testing websites during an introductory programming class at that age. I've used them for the rest of my life without any difficulty. Strict (formal) regexes are extremely simple, and even when using crazy implementations that allow all kinds of backreferences and conditionals, 99.999% of regexes in the wild are extremely simple as well. And that's true in the example from TFA! There's nothing tricky or cryptic about this regex.
That said, what this regex wanted to be was obviously just a list. AWS should offer simpler abstractions (like lists) where they make sense.
> That said, what this regex wanted to be was obviously just a list. AWS should offer simpler abstractions (like lists) where they make sense.
Agree. I would understand if there was some obvious advantage here, but it doesn’t really seem like there is a dimension here where regex has an advantage over a list. It’s (1) harder to implement, (2) harder to review, (3) much harder to test comprehensively, (4) harder for users to use (correctly/safely).
This is too hot a take. Regular expressions are used in some cases where they shouldn’t be, yes, but there’s also been a ton of code which used other string operations but had bugs due to the complexity or edge-cases which would have been easier to avoid with a regex. You should know both tools and when they’re appropriate.
From an educational perspective, regular expressions are also a great way to teach about state machines, computational complexity, formal languages, and grammars in a way that has direct applications to tools that are long-lived and ubiquitous in industry.
It's also this context that reveals how much simpler strict regular expressions are than general purpose programming languages like Python or JavaScript. That simplicity is also part of what makes regexes so ubiquitous: due to its lower computational complexity, regex parsing is really fast and doesn't take much memory.
When I say regexes are simple, I'm not really talking about compactness. I mean low complexity in a computational sense! As someone who rather likes regex, I think it would be totally fair for a team to rule out all uses of PCRE2 that go beyond the scope of regular languages. Those uses of regex may be compact, but they're no longer simple.
I'm also someone who is sensitive to readability-centered critiques of terse languages. Awk, sed, and even Bash parameter expansion can efficiently do precise transformations, too. But sometimes they should be avoided in favor of solutions that are more verbose, more explicit, and involve less special syntax. (Note also that Bash, awk, and sed are also all much more complex than regex!)
Regex is not used for parsing HTML or C++ code. So it is not good for complex tasks.
What is the claim? That it is compact for simple cases. Well Brainfuck is a compact programming language but I don't see it in production. Why?
Because the whole point of programming is that multiple eyeballs of different competence are looking at the same code. It has to be as legible as possible.
> Regex is not used for parsing HTML or C++ code. So it is not good for complex tasks.
Again, this is too binary a way if thinking. There are string matching operations which are not parsing source code and regular expressions can be a concise choice there. I’ve had cases where someone wrote multiple pages of convoluted logic trying to validate things where the regular expression was not only much easier to read but also correct because while someone was writing the third else-if block they missed a detail.
This is heavily context dependent... There are plenty of situations where everyone knows the relevant factors, it's who has possession of land, resources, people, etc.
Yes, during the 2000's there was the "mashup" fads. People creating companies around mashing data from one service to another. Like putting Craigslist listings on a Google Map.
And guess what, all those mashup companies didn't last a couple of years. Because they didn't have a direct access to data.
It's trivially easy to watch the entire radio frequency range at once and triangulate the location of any transmission. If someone more powerful than you wants to stop you, they can.
It's (scarily) available in the commercial sector[1][2] from space if you have the need to purchase their services.
Suffice to say, military and intelligence agencies are probably a few generations ahead of this and you won't find them commenting on strategic capabilities on HN.
Thanks! Technically, what do you think is the biggest obstacle to achieve military grade hopping? Is it just cost, or something you simply cannot buy from open market AND cannot make one if you have the knowledge?
Military frequency hopping / spread spectrum isn’t really about preventing being noticed, it’s more about making it harder to jam. If you don’t have physical safety from the people “more powerful” than you who want to stop you, then they will still locate you easily and stop you using physical force.
If I'm not mistaken, the Photos app stores originals on disk and then uses a sqlite database to track metadata (and maybe edits to photos as well, given that it has the originals). Seems reasonable to me.
Fundamentally, people don't like situations with no good answer. I see it again and again, present a problem with no good answer and most people will resort to the answer that aligns with their political leanings even when faced with clear evidence they are wrong.
Look how quickly big business rolled over for The Felon--because they saw what mot people have been denying since the election.
big business will always act in the interest of big business.
Only a stupid business man will confront the full-might of the executive branch of the federal government heads on, particularly when the President is showing that he is willing to use that power against anybody
Big business will always side with the oppressors, it's like we learned nothing from history about colonialism, imperialism, or the history of european fascism. I mean FFS it was corporations that financed Mussolini. As you said they don't care, they just want to make money.
The audience of Porsche SUVs (cayenne, macan) care about signaling wealth via the badge. But they mostly want an everyday car for their commute, groceries / kid pickup.
No wonder the EVs options sell better. They have the badge, and are better at everyday tasks.
The 911 will stay gas powered (maybe e fuel at some point if mining of oil stops), because the target audience cares equally for signaling as well as the driving experience.
reply