Its interesting - the salary cap comes into play as well - but this article (and the parent article which is a bit more detailed into the tennis aspect itself) basically summarizes to 'top tennis players can use outsized prize winnings to hire top staff to extend their dominance'.
At the root - surely the same is true - top paid footballers likely pay (themselves or through the team) for top staff (physio, coaches, trainers) except substituting the resulting extension of dominance for whatever happens in that particular sport; whether growing older is more or less of a cost than in tennis.
What is interesting is that in a team sport, the money that Real Madrid makes is probably enough to hire top staff, which then applies to the whole team. (Players themselves may go above and beyond that.)
In tennis (simplifying) - there is no team, Federer gets all the money, Federer reinvests what he deems necessary into his own continued performance, expecting outsized benefits.
Now if the only benefit gained from being at the top is money, all that is necessary is outside funding of some sort to help punch your way into, and to extend your stay in the top 100. Would be curious if the two under 25s now dominating the scene are doing so on physicality, money, or more likely a blend of the two.
Essentially the article sort of describes the precarious-ness of being a top ~1000 player, having a very narrow period of time before finances fun out, or you age out (without the proper support structure, ex. get injured), before you start making the money necessary to fund staying in the sport at a high level. And I guess the argument is the sport would be more fair and balanced if ex. everyone who entered the top 1000 were able to get access to the support that the top 100 (or 10 as mentioned) have.
I had tried this but found it a little bit weird - switching back and forth on the same device between the 'hard drive w/ full files' library and the 'primary drive optimize storage' didn't really seem easy.
IIRC Photos.app will not even open if the default library you are pointing at is not there (i.e drive was unplugged). Are you able to just open up the library file directly and it will work as expected?
I also recall when changing Photos.app back to the HDD Library it did a ~2h 'rebuild' session before it even started downloading the new photos, but maybe thats acceptable with the 'every so often' approach.
This is awesome! This might be a great replacement to attempting to get the Windows app to work. Has anyone had luck with the iCloud app on windows?
Similar to some other folks in this thread I have ~2TB of iCloud data, a Macbook with far less than 2TB of space, an external hard drive somewhere with the external Photo Library that I need to plug in if I want to look at photos on the Macbook, and a Windows desktop with 10TB+ of rusty disks.
I was excited when they added the iCloud app + iCloud photos to Windows, but it never seems to catch up or finish what it is doing. It appears to be almost constantly download at 50MB/s, stressing both disk & internet, and yet navigating to the folder reveals that they are all 'available when online'.
It seems like there is not an option in Windows to actually grab everything in full quality (actually now that I look at it - its gotten to 944GB on disk / 1.91TB total, so it is getting there.)
I guess a real question - with these photos finally on a Windows desktop - is there a better photo browser than Microsoft photos that can show the HEIC and the Live Photo?
I don't have any particular horse in this race, but looking at this exchange, I hope its clear where the issue is coming from.
The original post states "I am seeing Codex do much better than Claude Code", and when asked for examples, you have replied with "I don't have time to give you examples, go do it yourself, its obvious."
That is clearly going to rub folks (anyone) the wrong way. This refrain ("Wheres the data?") pops up frequently on HN, if its so obvious, giving 1 prompt where Codex is much greater than Claude doesn't seem like a heavy lift.
In absence of such an example, or any data, folks have nothing to go on but skepticism. Replying with such a polarizing comment is bound to set folks off further.
Zachtronics has an excellent game(?) Shenzhen I/O which is such a good simulacrum of an embedded SDE; reading datasheets, coding, and sending emails, that I couldn't play it!
But I highly recommend it, if thats not your day job - or if you are curious about making it so!
Never hosted or surfed, but joined the meetups in a couple of different cities when traveling, and it was great every time. (This was 2013) Seems like it just had a nice group of people.
Seems like a fair point, given OPs opening says “crowdfund independent testing of specific products you actually buy” - having the top products be more commonly bought items may be interesting.
Posting the same link 4 times in 18 days, by the author, certainly seems like self-promo, but somehow allowed? I don't see any URL manipulation, and it certainly took off today. (I found it interesting!)
A&B testing of post names seems to lead some useful information ;)
I don't see your reference to "Georgetown students..." in either the website link or the user's submissions? Was it modified?
Glad you found it interesting, yeah I was experimenting with different names and obviously this one was the best. Not trying to self-promo as I am not like selling any product but just thought people would enjoy the article! Sorry if I violated any of the unwritten HN norms... but glad people are reading it now and having interesting discussions
That one Apple is still allowed to collect fees on (which I'd love to see the provided justification for!).
Per the article: "Apple can no longer collect a 27 percent commission on purchases made outside of apps or restrict how developers can direct users to alternate payment options"
This now allows folks to direct users to alternate methods. Before this the Kindle app would just say something along the lines of "you can't get a book here, please use the website".
People leaving is definitely a step-function of negatives as the responsibilities get shared between the (now smaller!) team.
I think GP was more saying that improving retention, at a % level, is a slow ship to steer. (At least what is available at the manager level.) Decreasing retention across the org in the long term doesn’t happen overnight, and it can take a while to observe whether the effect is trending downwards or upwards. (And also depends on what signal you use - people actually leaving, or people talking about leaving!)
At the root - surely the same is true - top paid footballers likely pay (themselves or through the team) for top staff (physio, coaches, trainers) except substituting the resulting extension of dominance for whatever happens in that particular sport; whether growing older is more or less of a cost than in tennis.
What is interesting is that in a team sport, the money that Real Madrid makes is probably enough to hire top staff, which then applies to the whole team. (Players themselves may go above and beyond that.)
In tennis (simplifying) - there is no team, Federer gets all the money, Federer reinvests what he deems necessary into his own continued performance, expecting outsized benefits.
Now if the only benefit gained from being at the top is money, all that is necessary is outside funding of some sort to help punch your way into, and to extend your stay in the top 100. Would be curious if the two under 25s now dominating the scene are doing so on physicality, money, or more likely a blend of the two.
Essentially the article sort of describes the precarious-ness of being a top ~1000 player, having a very narrow period of time before finances fun out, or you age out (without the proper support structure, ex. get injured), before you start making the money necessary to fund staying in the sport at a high level. And I guess the argument is the sport would be more fair and balanced if ex. everyone who entered the top 1000 were able to get access to the support that the top 100 (or 10 as mentioned) have.
reply