jeremydeanlakey's comments

Here in the US, we had a candidate include a picture of himself... wearing a captain hat and striking a dramatic pose. He said he put it there to filter out the wrong kind of companies. We hired him.

It looks like @GooglePlayDev responded on Twitter 4h ago.

https://twitter.com/GooglePlayDev/status/1166999937156100096

Good luck to the developer!

More direct link without all the ads and clutter:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BxFlIZpAT7a/?utm_source=ig_embed

At first I thought it was counterintuitive.

But after self-reflection, I'm more likely to report it if it did have money.

If it had money, I'd feel an obligation to protect it and return it to the owner. If it didn't, I'd feel more like it's their problem.

The doors at my work open with an app. It connects through the internet.

My phone switches from mobile data to wifi as I get near the door, causing a several second wait. Now I hit the button before I reach the wifi and then run to the door to try to get it before it locks again.

Hopefully we never lose internet...

Not familiar with Nest. Does your thermostat not work if your internet doesn't work?

My code is having some trouble with Firestore as well. I was getting 503s ten minutes ago but now it's just really slow.

> unfortunately all I've got are upvotes instead

I wouldn't call that unfortunate. You pretty much nailed it and no one has much to add.

I agree. I included my wording specifically because of this.

My response email to the rejection today was very clear. Unfortunately, it was also passive aggressive.

Hopefully I'll learn to clear my head before reacting next time.

Update: Google's reversed their decision and the appeal is accepted.

I wrote a passive-aggressive email. I posted this. I tweeted at them (first tweet ever).

I'm not sure what worked, but something got through. Thanks all for the support.

So far as I can tell, yes.

I googled the app in the screenshots and it shows in google but now it 404s, just like Mommy Saver Plus. So it seems they removed the correct app also.

I tried tweeting at them now. My first tweet ever. (Please someone tell me if I goofed it in any way.)

https://twitter.com/jeremydeanlakey/status/11106845016659968...

Update: I looked up the app in the screenshots attached to Google's email. It appears to have been removed as well.

Sorry about the error. I noticed and flicked the "enable https" shortly after posting. I flicked it off again for now.

> The most trifling Actions that affect a Man’s Credit, are to be regarded. The Sound of your Hammer at Five in the Morning or Nine at Night, heard by a Creditor, makes him easy Six Months longer.

> never keep borrow’d Money an Hour beyond the Time you promis’d, lest a Disappointment shuts up your Friends Purse forever.

> the good Paymaster is Lord of another Man’s Purse. He that is known to pay punctually and exactly to the Time he promises, may at any Time, and on any Occasion, raise all the Money his Friends can spare.

> Creditors are a kind of People, that have the sharpest Eyes and Ears, as well as the best Memories of any in the World.

Credit scores have replaced reputation and credit has become very impersonal. Interestingly, most of this seems more applicable than ever... with the exception of banging your hammer at 5 am.

> It’s nothing but a minor inconvenience to switch between android and iOS.

Switching includes spending hundreds of dollars plus hours to setup and figure things out plus several days of frustrating adjustments.

You might call that a "minor inconvenience". It certainly is more minor than my examples above. But that absolutely is enough to separate the two app markets. Virtually nobody will switch systems for an app.

If the products aren't interchangeable, then they are separate markets. Someone in the market for a part that fits a Ford can't solve their problem by buying the similar part that only fits a Chevy. Likewise, he can't but a new tire to replace a carburator. The tire and carburator are also in separate markets.

However, he can buy an aftermarket part. It's a different product but the same market. So they don't have a monopoly.

I don't know much about antitrust law so I can't comment on that But I do understand basic economics. And from an economic perspective, Apple most definitely created a monopoly which they most definitely use for rent seeking.

Your argument relies on combining the markets for iOS and Android apps into a single market. These are separate markets because you can't put an Android app on iPhone or an iOS app on Android.

If iOS had 100% share, you probably wouldn't say it doesn't have a monopoly on apps because you can just use desktop apps instead.

I also wouldn't say Comcast doesn't have a monopoly because they only have xx% share and you can move to a different state or country and get another provider. Or use your phone for internet instead.

> Ease of customer switching argument

This is confusing the consumer market for smartphones and the markets for distribution of smartphone app.

> Supply-Side Price elasticity argument

Yeah, if any monopoly's cut is too high, you can exit the market. This is not an argument that the monopoly is not a monopoly. This only means there is a limit to the monopoly's power.

I was about to say the same. I bet you can have your pick of the top senior engineers for 120K (most devs whose salary I've heard make less than 100K). And you'd probably get loyalty too - a lot of them don't want to go anywhere.