No more coal mining on public lands

The federal coal leasing policy has been dangerously out of step with the public good on our public health and the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels. Climate change is an emergency and we can no longer afford for our public lands to be a major source of climate change pollution. It’s long past time for federal land use policy that prioritizes the health and safety of Americans, not the profits of coal industry executives. We must keep fossil fuels in the ground.

Sign the petition.

United Electrical Workers endorse Sanders

Bernie Sanders has received the endorsement of over 100 national and local unions representing well over a million people, including a 35,000 person unanimous endorsement from the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America. That’s amazing. In response, he had this to say:

During my 25 years in Congress, I have been proud to stand side by side with the UE fighting to increase the minimum wage to a living wage; to guarantee health care to every man, woman and child as a right; to make it easier for workers to join unions; to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure; to transform our nation’s energy system; and against disastrous trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement and normalized trade with China which have destroyed millions of decent-paying jobs in America.

This is a concise elucidation of why I voted for Bernie Sanders in the NY primary. I’m glad he’s polling increasingly well against Hillary in California, but unfortunately I don’t think Pennsylvania and Maryland favor Sanders.

Ask “the big 5” nations to deliver on their Paris climate commitments

World leaders have officially signed the groundbreaking Paris climate agreement — and now it’s time to put this visionary blueprint for global climate action into motion. We’re looking to the world’s five largest emitters of climate-wrecking carbon pollution — the U.S., the European Union, China, India and Brazil — to lead this fight against climate chaos. Sign the petition calling on The Big 5 to deliver on their Paris climate commitments.

Sign the Petition

All new watchOS apps will require using the watchOS 2 SDK

It’s been very trendy to dislike the Apple Watch recently, and especially to decry the future of Apple based on the product’s performance in the marketplace to date. In any case, Apple have kept moving forward with their Watch, from Ben Collier:

Apple’s Developer News states that all new watchOS apps need to be built with watchOS 2.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise, the original watchOS apps clearly were a stopgap until Apple could finish the watchOS 2 software. Since its launch there wasn’t a compelling reason to write any new watch apps in anything but the faster and more reliable watchOS 2.

Apps on the Apple Watch are something of a mistake in my opinion. As a very satisfied user of the Watch, I never open an app through the circular app interface: it’s all about notifications, complications, and glances. I’d like to see custom faces announced at WWDC, because I’d love to see what 3rd party developers could do with custom watch faces.

The roadmap to self-driving cars

Jim Dalrymple of The Loop:

Reuters:

In the race to develop self-driving cars, the United States and Europe lead in technology, but China is coming up fast in the outside lane with a regulatory structure that could put it ahead in the popular adoption of autonomous cars on its highways and city streets.

I’m not surprised at all. This is going to be an interesting battle over the next 5 years or so

This is a story of the same proportion as the race to land on the moon. In many ways, the future of humanity depends on self-driving electric cars, because the amount of carbon and physical waste produced by our need for transportation has already irrevocably damaged our only planet. Furthermore, the first country that has a technology company that can get a self-driving product on the road is going to reap a lot of monetary reward. It’s going to take coordinated action from governments to correctly regulate and technology companies to safely implement to pull off a consumer or even B2B self-driving, perhaps electric, car.

What companies do you know of that can pull off radical innovation and package it into a sleek product that people want?

Paul’s week in review response: April 24, 2016

Katie Floyd posts excellent week-in-reviews posts, and I thought I’d offer my thoughts on some of those headlines.

Apple introduced an update to the MacBook Line. The update includes faster processors, longer battery life and a new Rose Gold option.

The MacBook, historically, has been a product which has lower-end hardware and broader appeal than the Pro variant. These MacBooks seem to make a different set of compromises, where the hardware is still lower-end but the price is not, and it’s viscerally appealing (to me and I presume others) but it’s not so broad because of the single USB-C port. I’ve seen a couple in the wild, so I presume they’re popular.

That new MacBook Pro (and hopefully a Retina External Cinema Display) that I’ve been longing for might just be announced at WWDC. Apple has announced the World Wide Developers Conference will kick off June 13th in San Francisco.

It’s difficult not to think about it, but I’ve prepared my bank account for purchasing a refreshed MacBook Pro for 6 months now, so I’m trying to go into this WWDC without any expectations. But I assure Apple executives my bank account is ready for a MacBook Pro!

With regards to WWDC, I haven’t received word about my ticket status yet so I hope they’re are still tickets to be had!

Last week the iTunes Movies and iBooks store suddenly went dark in China.

China and Apple must have such a complicated relationship. China wants to keep Apple’s manufacturing in China, but likely resents an American company putting a camera, microphone, and Internet-connected device into Chinese people’s lives. Similarly, Apple saves a lot of money manufacturing in China and makes a lot of money selling their devices there, but likely resents the privacy compromises it has to make to do business there and the control the Chinese government retain over Apple’s business there.

In legal news this week, the Justice Department has dropped its New York case against Apple in an effort to obtain a passcode for an iPhone 5s. … This news comes on the heals of a report that the FBI paid in excess of $1 million for the hack that was used to access the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone 5c.

This is a PR battle that I’m pleased Apple to have won. The Feds and government officials must be so embarrassed to have learned nothing from the San Bernardino iPhone, and Apple have been schooling them on the facts about encryption. I’ve been so accustomed to government getting what they want that it’s almost unusual to be happy with this result.

UK Cabinet office to gag scientists

Science is our best tool for understanding the world, and scientific results can be inconvenient, like in these cases from the Guardian:

These critics highlight examples such as those of sociologists whose government-funded research shows new housing regulations are proving particularly damaging to the homeless; ecologists who discover new planning laws are harming wildlife; or climate scientists whose findings undermine government energy policy. All would be prevented from speaking out under the new grant scheme as it stands.

These policies go into effect in Britain on May 1st unless something changes, and that would be a grand shame.

Update 4/26/16

Thank goodness:

Ministers have exempted thousands of scientists from a controversial “gagging clause” that would have prevented the academics from trying to influence government on public policy matters.

App Store pay-to-play redux

There has been a lot reaction to Bloomberg’s story of pay-to-play App Store results. Initially, I discounted the report on grounds that Apple doesn’t stand to make a lot of money on it. Having thought about it more, and considering new evidence, I’m not so sure. Namely, Marco Arment‘s and John Gruber‘s pieces made me reconsider:

Also, Arment raises a good question, wondering about the motivations of whoever leaked the story to Bloomberg:

Either to warm us up to the idea so we’re not so mad in June, or by someone inside who doesn’t think it’s right and wants ammo to win the argument internally.

I’ve been wondering about this too. I don’t think it makes sense that it’s a trial balloon from someone in favor of the program. Apple doesn’t care about “warming us up” to changes. They don’t care. I think it makes more sense as a leak from someone opposed to it, and who foresaw that it wouldn’t go over well. Damn curious either way, though.

The App Store started off indie because of the shared code with Mac and intense developer interest, but I think Apple’s plan has always been to cater to big brands, like Nike, Disney, Bank of America, etc. Arguably, Apple has an incentive to keep the cost of software on the App Store as low as possible, because a rich ecosystem of low-cost apps further justifies the high cost of their hardware. Here’s Ben Thompson on this point in 2013:

It’s a reason to buy Apple hardware, and that’s all that matters. Anything that on the surface makes the store less desirable for hardware buyers – such as more expensive apps – is not in Apple’s interest.

The reason I was wrong about Apple making money on paid search is I was looking at this from my own perspective, that Apple doesn’t stand to make money from me (and people like me) on pay-to-play App Store search results. But from the big brands like Nike, Disney, and Bank of America, etc, Apple absolutely stands to make good money. And perhaps Apple believe this to be a way of solving the discoverability problem too. Another reason I was wrong is that Apple doesn’t stand to make a lot of money compared to their hardware today, but mobile trends suggest that people are spending less and less time searching for things in their browser on, say, Google, and increasingly spending time in apps. Bloomberg themselves called this a “Google-like” approach, and so maybe Apple is thinking this is how they can take some of Google’s future business.

In any case, I think we should all wait for an actual announcement from Apple before getting to worked up about this.

The gender pay gap in tech

I followed the public posting of salaries on Hacker News yesterday, and it’s pretty interesting to see how, frankly, high salaries in tech are today. But not quite the same high for everyone:

Not only are women grossly under-represented among developers, but they are grossly under-paid. Women earned on average $13,000 less than their male counterparts. Even when you control for location, title, and years of experience, women still get $5,000 less per year than men.

Big money and Sanders’ viability

My criticisms of Hillary Clinton as president is that I don’t think her interests are aligned with the people, and relatedly, she’s continually shown herself to be a war hawk. Here’s Trevor Timm from the Guardian on this point:

[I]t would be difficult not to worry about at least the potential for a conflict of interest, when weapons manufacturers and Saudi Arabia were making donations to the Clinton Foundation while their weapons deals were approved by the State Department, oil companies were doing the same before the State Department approved the oil sands pipeline project, and other fossil fuels donated at around the same time the secretary was advocating increased fracking abroad.

There’s a narrative that this paranoia borders McCarthyism that substitutes communism with money, because even Sanders in the NY debate couldn’t name a single action that Clinton took that was influenced by her donations. I don’t buy it. When I pay for something, like a hosting service or a hot meal or rent, I expect a return on investment. There’s no way that Clinton’s donors, some of the most profitable organizations on Earth, are giving her money out of the goodness of their heart, the notion is ludicrous.

And that’s why I’m glad Sanders has a plan. Here’s his campaign manager explaining Sanders’ pitch to Democrats:

And in November, you know, only about a quarter of the population is Democrats. If you can’t create a coalition with independent voters, you can’t win the White House. You can’t win the Senate. You can’t bring additional people into the House.

So this is what has to be built in November. It has to be Democrats along with independents to defeat the Republicans. And Bernie Sanders is the candidate who can do that.

 

1.5C climate change report

Climate change science and its economic and socio-cultural impact is a fascinating and relatedly terrifying case study into the human condition. The last battle was to limit emissions to curtail warming the oceans to 2C over the pre-industrial era. But this may not be enough, recent science suspects:

The 1.5C report was requested by governments meeting at the Paris climate talks in December where countries unexpectedly agreed to “pursue efforts” to limit warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. 1.5C marks the point, say many scientists, where there is a real danger of serious “tipping points” in the world’s climate. Temperatures have already risen 1C and show little sign of slowing.

I agree with the aphorism that “no one person can do everything to solve this problem, but everyone can do something.” Try to curtail waste in your everyday life, and vote for government that realizes the dangers of global climate change.

Corporate greed and Bernie Sanders

I suspect one of the reasons we cannot “afford” universal healthcare, living wages, or paid family leave in the richest country on Earth is that multinationals dodge their taxes. So I’m sad to learn that the EU has failed to create adequate regulations for public country-by-country reporting of income tax. Panama and states like it are tax havens for massive amounts of money, but there’s sufficient multinational tax dodging in the EU and the US we should focus on first.

Corporate greed needs to end. They’re taking advantage of the benefits of America, yet refuse to accept their responsibilities as Americans.

Bernie Sanders

This is why I’m upset that Bernie Sanders was trounced in the New York democratic primary. I don’t believe that Hillary Clinton can accept Big Money’s paychecks for speeches and still fight for the interests of the People, they’re going to want their return on investment.

Apple refused requests for source code from China

MacRumors:

During the hearing today, which was entitled “Deciphering the Debate Over Encryption: Industry and Law Enforcement Perspectives,” Apple’s General Counsel Bruce Sewell continued to defend the need for strong user encryption. He also clarified, however, that Apple has refused requests from China for source code.

Can we compromise and make it open source?

More seriously, this is more evidence that Apple is taking the moral high road (never mind the functional high ground) instead of seeking publicity.

Apple updates MacBook

I’ve been speculating for some time that the Macs were due a refresh. Admittedly, I’ve had my trigger finger ready to move on a new Apple notebook for 6 months or so. When The rumor mill saw Best Buy pull the MacBooks from their shelves, I thought maybe something was coming! From Apple this morning:

“MacBook is the thinnest and lightest Mac we have ever made and it’s our vision for the future of the notebook,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing. “Customers are going to love this update to MacBook, with the latest processors, faster graphics, faster flash storage, longer battery life and a beautiful rose gold finish.”

Not quite what I’m on the market for in a professional notebook, but Schiller is absolutely right that those notebooks are beautiful. I bet the rose gold will be a hit. Here are some facts for nerds from MacStories:

The MacBook now comes with the sixth-generation dual-core Intel Core M processors that go up to 1.3GHz, with Turbo Boost speeds up to 3.1GHz. It also now comes with faster PCIe-based flash storage and faster 1866MHz memory.

These are luxury consumer-grade notebooks, because they’re expensive, undeniably thin, and equally undeniably underpowered considering other (admittedly bigger) options. I hope that the MacBook Pro update retains this aesthetic (including the color options!) but offers a state-of-the-art graphics card.

Fingers crossed for WWDC!

Tremors in distributed content

The economics of offering free hosting for user’s content and monetizing based on tracking and advertising is going to become more and more expensive for businesses. The reason for this is that tracking is there’s going to be more and more data, the competition is going to be fiercer (especially competition from self-hosted options), and ad-block is going to increasingly cut into profits (especially amongst “millennials”) . It came as no surprise to me to read Frederic Filloux‘s excellent article:

Leaked Buzzfeed numbers sent a jolt to the many who dreamed of jumping on the distributed content bandwagon. This particular genre of advertising business model might have been overrated.

It was a bad week in the distributed content sector where gazillions “content views” were once touted as the new digital digital bonanza. On April 12th, The FT.com reported that Buzzfeed, until now the genre’s gold standard, had halved its 2016 revenue projections from $500m to $250m, after making $150m in 2015, 30% lower than expected.

I struggle to sympathize with BuzzFeed because I find their brand of clickbait so pernicious to an Internet of quality dialogue, and I have to constantly filter out BuzzFeed from Reddit and Facebook, etc. What more, but sometimes I filter it out incorrectly, because they do have quality longform as well.

Serious app review flaws

If you submit your app to the App Store, Apple can do what they want with it. Will they approve it? Maybe, if you follow the rules. Will they promote it? Maybe, if you adopt the latest technologies, but probably not. Will you be removed from the store when you try to submit an update? Maybe, if your reviewer is in a bad mood. Here’s John Vorhees of MacStories on this issue:

I don’t know a developer who hasn’t had a run-in with App Review and wondered, ‘Maybe this is it. This is where my my app dies.’ That may sound a little dramatic, but read the results of Graham Spencer’s poll of developers– the feeling is real.

I can imagine that some at Apple may roll their eyes at this as an overreaction, or be a little offended at the implied lack of trust, but step into developers’ shoes. In the absence of meaningful communication by Apple of its intentions, it’s stories like the Reddit client take-downs that shape developers’ behavior. And as Federico noted, it’s not like this is an isolated story, it’s one of a long string of similar stories that make developers jumpy.

I was recently at a developer meet-up where the speaker was talking about external dependancies, like third-party libraries and services, like Parse or Facebook. The audience figuratively nodded in easy approval. But when this transitioned to “Who here trusts Apple?” and the claim that “Apple is our biggest dependency”, the uneasiness was palpable.

The App Store is not open-source or ruled by public committee: it is Apple’s. By and large, they do any excellent job in moderating quality and exercise fairness in enforcing the rules. But as with all rule enforcement, it can’t be done perfectly. If you want fair and equal, you should make your app open-source. If you want to charge money, Apple are taking their cut. And this is fair, considering their investment and effort in creating the platform.

But it would be nice to get paid upgrades and a Mac App Store that works.

Pay-to-play on the App Store

Ever since Big Money came to the App Store, it’s become harder and harder for independent developers to make a living selling software there, and I believe this should concern Apple. Here’s Craig Grannell from Revert to Saved:

Given that Apple doesn’t comment on rumours, take Bloomberg’s story Apple Pursues New Search Features for a Crowded App Store with a pinch of salt. The claim is that Apple has

constructed a secret team to explore changes to the App Store, including a new strategy for charging developers to have their apps more prominently displayed

For me, the key paragraph in the story is this:

If Apple goes through with the idea, “it’s going to be huge,” said Krishna Subramanian, the co-founder of Captiv8, which helps brands market using social media. “Anything that you can do to help drive more awareness to your app, to get organic downloads, is critical.”

Subramanian is right in one sense: if Apple does this, it will be huge. It’ll be huge in eradicating any sense that the App Store is a meritocracy when it comes to app visibility.

I doubt this is true, because I don’t understand this move at all. Apple makes their biggest margins on selling their hardware, and any potential revenue from App Store pay-to-play will be dwarfed by profits from their products. The App Store needs some work done on discovery, but it’s not to make discovery less egalitarian towards Big Money.