Arcus is the leading platform making payments possible for everyone

Arcus

arcus

Introduction If you are looking at the state of software development you can see that serverless is starting to go mainstream. As complexity grows in software and more integration is introduced to produce a more dynamic and effective application you are bound to need more tooling. In this article, I want to introduce a serverless framework that might make you think again when looking at going serverless. Architect is an opinionated serverless framework that focuses on reducing the complexity of working with multiple AWS cloud services. It prioritizes speed with fast local dev, smart configurable defaults, and flexible infrastructure as code. Architect When you see the config file you should be able to tell what is going on and what resources are available. Architect supports multiple runtimes, but for the sake of simplicity, we will be using Node.js. In this introduction to Architect, we will be building creating a REST endpoint that takes user data converts it into QR code and sends email out using with my url. SES 💡 Please be sure that the email you use for this is example is authorized with SES Prerequisites AWS account Node.js Some cloud knowledge Step 1 First you will have to create a new architect app with the following command, which should create your boilerplate project with an file. app.arc npm init @architect architect-qr-email-service cd architect-qr-email-service Your app.arc file is your configuration files, which will be used to create your resources such as lambdas, database, queues as you  can see in the code below. There is not much going on but with time this file will grow with time. Architect takes the complexity of cloud formation, AWS's schema language, and refines it down into a declarative specification. When you look at the app.arc file, you are able to determine exactly what is going on and what resources were created. @app
architect-qr-email-service

@http ## http endpoint get
get /

# @aws
# profile default
# region us-west-1 Step 2 Now that we have a starting point let’s start creating some services. First, we will need a POST endpoint that will take some user data so we can store it for record-keeping.  This will not only be your route, but also the name in your directory as that is used by architect to determine what to build for what resource. record-creation Configuration File @app
architect-qr-email-service

@http
post /record-creation ***Folder Structure *** Let’s install some so you can see a bit more tooling from arc, which will help us parse body json and more. architect helper functions npm i @architect/functions -S Now let’s add starter code that will take user data and return a helping message that it is running. let arc = require('@architect/functions')


exports.handler = async function http(req) {

  const body = arc.http.helpers.bodyParser(req)

  if (!body || !body.email, !body.name) {
    return {
      statusCode: 400,
      body: 'Missing user email and or name'
    }
  }


  console.info({ ...body })


  return {
    statusCode: 200,
    headers: {
      'content-type': 'application/json;'
    },
    body: JSON.stringify({
      message: `User Data Received`
    })
  }
} One of the benefits of using architect is the simplicity of running serverless locally as it manages its own sandbox. Just run and if your files and app.arc file is correct should start service running on . Now that that is done just hit the post npm run start http://localhost:3333 The response should look something like this: So let’s take a step back and realize what we just did. We created  API gateway locally that pointed to a directory that holds a lambda function called . record-creation Step 3 Now let’s do a bit more with this. We should take advantage of AWS lambda and utilize one of the best tools serverless echo system has to offer queues, which in the AWS world that resource is called . Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) This we will be doing Creating two queues functions creating a dynamodb table that takes a index combination of (email and name) You app.arc configuration file will have to be updated to add 2 new queues called and . notification-handler record-handler Now that we have updated the configuration file. We will create a similar file structure, but instead of adding an http directory we will be creating under a queues directory. You can do this manually or run this command will read app.arc file and create all new corresponding files. npx arc init If you look at the app.arc file you will notice that each queue has its own corresponding directory. So directory will handle all record-handler queue events that are published to it. record-handler Let’s modify the so it publishes to a queue . record-creation record-handler let arc = require('@architect/functions')

exports.handler = async function http(req) {
  const body = arc.http.helpers.bodyParser(req)

  if (!body || !body.email || !body.name || !body.twitter) {
    console.error(body, 'Missing user email, name, twitter handle')
    return {
      statusCode: 400,
      body: 'Missing user email and or name'
    }
  }


// publish to the record-handler queue based on our config
  await arc.queues.publish({
    name: 'record-handler',
    payload: { ...body },
  })

  console.info('message published to record-handler')

  return {
    statusCode: 200,
    headers: {
      'content-type': 'application/json;'
    },
    body: JSON.stringify({
      message: `User Data Received`
    })
  }
} Now let’s modify the record handler that will save it to dynamo db and push it to a new queue as this function is only responsible for saving the record.  You can see we use  @architect/functions , which allows us to connect to dynamo db instance and save events for more on this see arc.codes docs. let arc = require('@architect/functions')

exports.handler = async function queue(event) {
  console.info('incoming message to queue record-handler', event)

  let client = await arc.tables()
  // handle incoming event, which could come in as a array
  await Promise.all(event.Records.map(async record => {
    //save a record for each one and publish new event

    const parsedBody = JSON.parse(record.body)
    const body = { ...parsedBody, id: Math.random() }

    await client.records.put(body)

    await arc.queues.publish({
      name: 'notification-handler',
      payload: body,
    })
  }))

} Now that we are publishing to queue let’s do a little more let’s handle the event and push out an email using aws-sdk , with a qr of your Twitter handle. notification-handler let QRCode = require('qrcode')
let AWS = require('aws-sdk');

exports.handler = async function queue(event) {
  try {
    console.info('incoming message to queue notification-handler', event)
    const AwsSes = new AWS.SES({ apiVersion: '2010-12-01' })

    // handle incoming event, which could come in as a array
    await Promise.all(event.Records.map(async record => {

      //save a record for each one and publish new event
      const parsedBody = JSON.parse(record.body)
      const qrcodeString = `https://twitter.com/${parsedBody.twitter}`

      const base64qr = await new Promise((resolve, _reject) => {
        QRCode.toString(qrcodeString, { type: 'terminal' },
          function (err, QRcode) {
            if (err) return console.error("error occurred")
            // Printing the generated code for your debugging purposes
            console.info(QRcode)
          })

        QRCode.toDataURL(qrcodeString, function (err, code) {
          if (err) return console.error("error occurred")
          resolve(code)
        })
      })


      const sendPromise = await AwsSes.sendEmail({
        Destination: {
          ToAddresses: [
            parsedBody.email,
          ]
        },
        Message: {
          Body: {
            Html: {
              Charset: "UTF-8",
              Data: `<img src="${base64qr}" alt=${parsedBody.twitter} />`
            },
            Text: {
              Charset: "UTF-8",
              Data: qrcodeString
            }
          },
          Subject: {
            Data: 'Architect QR Email Service ' + parsedBody.twitter
          }
        },
        Source: parsedBody.email,
      }).promise();

      console.info("Email Sent", sendPromise)
    }))


  } catch (error) {
    console.error('Failed to handle notification message', error)
    throw new Error('Failed to handle notification message')
  }
} Step 4 Let’s test what we have now locally by running and triggering the same rest endpoint as before your result should be QR code in your terminal and email. num run start I would like to note that the email you use should be authorized in AWS SES for this to work. So any issues go to get this done. here The result in your email should be something like the following Step 5 One additional thing you will need to do is create a custom AWS policy to give you access to SES service.  Simply go to IAM in your AWS console and create a policy under SES service so you can manually add the JSON policy. Please name the policy as you will need it to match your custom macro later. ArcSESPolicy {
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Action": "ses:*",
            "Resource": "*"
        }
    ]
} What is a macro ? A macro extends the functionality of your architect app with standard CloudFormation. It allows developers to add any resources or modify existing ones extending Architect into the entire AWS ecosystem supported by CloudFormation So for us, we will add a new field in app.arc and add a new directory called macro. In the macro directory add . add-policies.js Configuration File @app
architect-qr-email-service

@http
post /record-creation ## http endpoint that will listen for our rest call

@queues
record-handler ## handle message that is publish by record-creation endpoint and saves it
notification-handler ## triggers email notification

## configuration to create a dynamo db 
@tables 
records
  email *String
  name **String


@macros 
add-policies ## modify your cloudformation during build timeto add SES policy permission File structure add-policies.js code to be added /**
 * Add Managed Policies
 *
 * @param {object} arc - Parsed `app.arc` value
 * @param {object} sam - Generated CloudFormation template
 * @param {string} stage - Deployment target runtime environment 'staging' or 'production'
 * @returns {object} Modified CloudFormation template
 */

module.exports = async function macro(arc, cfn) {
  if (cfn.Resources.Role) {
    const newPolicies = [
      {
        PolicyName: 'ArcSESPolicy', // remember this should match your ses policy
        PolicyDocument: {
          Statement: [
            {
              Effect: 'Allow',
              Action: ['ses:*'],
              Resource: '*',
            },
          ],
        },
      },
    ]
    cfn.Resources.Role.Properties.Policies = [...cfn.Resources.Role.Properties.Policies, ...newPolicies]
  }
  return cfn
} Step 6 Let’s deploy this baby to AWS for that all you have to do is run , which will deploy a QA stack for you. This deploy command reads your app.arc configuration files and creates your cloudformation file that will be used to create all resources. npx arc deploy Once that is completed you can verify all the resources we're created. SQS queues: Lambdas: Dynamo table: API Gateway: Now that we verified all the resources let’s test the url that your deploy script should have produced. Mine looked something like this . https://ka3ube9vj6.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com With that, I will just trigger gateway with the same route as before of record-creation curl --request POST \
  --url https://ka3ube9vj6.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/record-creation \
  --header 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{
	"email": "martin@gizmodlabs.com",
	"name": "Martin Patino",
	"twitter": "thisguymartin"
}' If everything works correctly you should be getting qrcode email from your aws service same as before. 🛑 If for some reason you do not get a email. This could be do to a error possibly permission reason. I would recommend that you purge your queue with dangling message and debug the issues if not your message will be dangling their until the issue is resolved. . See cloudwatch for logging information Step 7 Once you are done and no longer want the project in your aws account simply run and should delete all resources and dynamodb tables. npx arc destroy --app architect-qr-email-service --force Thank you for joining me on this serverless journey of yours and I hope this gave you a small taste of the power of . Architect Here is the GitHub repo if you require further info: or assistance. https://github.com/thisguymartin/architect-qr-email-service Also published on: https://dev.to/thisguymartin/architect-a-easy-way-to-jump-into-the-serverless-world-285h

How to 'Architect' an Easy Way into the Serverless World

This is Part two of a series wherein we build a “Hello World” application. If you are late to the party, I encourage you to check Part 1 first. _Wherein we try to use the Microsoft Visual C++ Compiler on Linux_hackernoon.com A C++ Hello World And A Glass Of Wine, Oh My ! Hic Sunt Arcūs So, our Boss came in to check on our progress. They were starting to wonder why it takes a whole day to port a 3 lines application to a new system. But the real reason of their visit was to ask for a new feature. While our “Hello world” business is booming, the marketing department thinks the lack of graphical UI is hurting sales. See, nobody escapes software bloat. Still. Eager to make the boss forget the time it takes to setup MSVC on Linux, I went above and beyond and completed a full rewrite of our app. Of course, we also provide a small nifty build file. The Linux version is still building fine. Duh The author likes to pretend all Linux machines are born with Qt And QBS installed. Just play along. In case of nuclear disaster, click “no” Let’s enthusiastically build the Windows version Not so Qt. Yeah, turns out, we need a build of Qt compatible with our compiler. Right now, even QBS doesn’t know about Qt. I went to download Qt on . That site is getting worse by the day. The Qt company tries to dissuade people to get the open source version. But if you go to you have all the tarballs and installers. https://www.qt.io/download https://download.qt.io/ Speaking of installers, they do not offer a 64 bits version for Windows. in 2018. We may have to restrict ourselves to 32 bits builds and extract that with WINE. Except it doesn’t work because the Qt installer framework has no silent mode ( apparently, you can script a silent mode in 100 lines of JavaScript ) and uses some Windows methods unsupported by WINE. Nevermind. I will build Qt myself to prove how awesome my WINE toolchain is. And it will be 64 bits. I’ll get promoted and the intern who has 4 PHD will bring me cappuccinos. Maybe people will even use my name as a verb ( If you don’t yet, you should definitively check it out !). Godbolt Except. Qt still uses to build itself. And exists only to make look cool and modern. There is an to build Qt with and while this is very exciting, it may be a bit too cutting edge, even for this blog. qmake qmake cmake ongoing effort qbs So, we are stuck with . is a build system generator which unfortunately conflates toolchains and build systems. I did attempt to create configuration for my wine toolchain, it was actually rather simple, and it did generates some Makefiles with the proper commands. But they were Makefiles for which is a make-like tool for windows albeit with a format that is not quite compatible with the original make. I tried using (which works fine) but then all the subsequents / calls happen in the wine environment which means it executes the actual cl.exe rather than our wrapper and so our crude slashes-to-backslashes transformation script never gets run and the compilation fails because assumes anything starting with is an option. And we can’t get nmake to call our fake wrapper since nmake is a windows process and windows doesn’t know about ELF. qmake qmake nmake nmake cl.exe link.exe cl.exe / cl.exe It is left as an exercise to the reader to calculate how many millions of dollars Windows using as a path separator and is costing the industry. \ The solution would be to patch . Which even the maintainer of actively avoid to do. So let’s not do that. qmake qmake I’m very sorry, but we will go back to our Windows VM and build Qt from there. That should be simple, right ? Of course, the VC build tools are unable to set up their environment properly. How many Microsoft Engineers does it take to set up a build environment ? Certainly quite a few, since I was able to find about 1900 lines of batch scripts serving that purpose, in 20 or so files. There are probably more. I manage to get my environment sorted in 3 lines. Remember, regardless of how complex your build system is, it boils down to a handful of variables. A compiler doesn’t needs much. set "INCLUDE=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual       Studio\2017\BuildTools\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.12.25827\include;%INCLUDE%"set "LIB=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\BuildTools\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.12.25827\lib\x64\;%LIB%"set "PATH=%PATH%;C:\Users\cor3ntin\Documents\qtbase-everywhere-src-5.10.0\gnuwin32" After that, it was a matter of downloading Qt 5.10 setting up a x64 build environment ( I used + the three lines above, but you can set up manually and not bother with at all). vcvars64.bat PATH vcvars.bat Make sure is installed and in the . perl PATH For the purpose of this article, I only need Qt Base (Core, Gui, Network… ) so that’s what I’m building. Building QtWebEngine - which uses chromium - is a bit more involved. configure -release -opensource -confirm-license -platform win32-msvc -nomake examples -nomake testsnmakenmake install Once Qt has done building, copy the folders back to your linux host. You need at least . put them in a new directory. I called mine . bin, include, lib, plugins qt5_10base-x64 I had issues with the includes referencing . So you can run from the Qt directory on windows and use the include folder generated in . Even then I had to copy a few files manually ( qconfig.h, q{core,gui,widgets,network,xml}-config.h) from the src folder to their respective include folder. Definitively a bit fiddly but eventually you will get there. src perl bin\syncqt.pl -copy -windows -version 5.10.0 -outdir cpy cpy My Linux is slowly morphing into a Windows Box. I expect Clippy to appear at any moment now. So now we have Qt. But how can we tell QBS to actually use it ? The profile system of QBS is one of the things that make it great. You can set up compiler toolchain globally and switch from one to another effortlessly. However to works with Qt, qbs needs a complete set of modules per profile. The gcc profile we used earlier is made of 160 qbs files setting each Qt library and component. Fortunately, all you need to do is to call this handy tool. qbs-setup-qt -hThis tool creates qbs profiles from Qt versions. Usage: qbs-setup-qt \[--settings-dir <settings directory>\] --detect  

qbs-setup-qt \[--settings-dir <settings directory>\] <path to qmake> <profile name>  

qbs-setup-qt -h|--help The first form tries to auto-detect all known Qt versions, looking them up via the PATH environment variable. The second form creates one profile for one Qt version. Except we can’t call that tool from linux because the built qmake is a windows application expected to run on Windows. Hopefully, someday we will get rid of qmake entirely, but for now, back to our Windows machine. We first of qbs and run the tool. install a windows build qbs-windows-x86_64-1.10.0\bin\qbs-setup-qt.exe --settings-dir . bin\qmake.exe msvc14-x64-qt That should create a folder with the proper Qt configuration. Move that folder to your linux machine in the folder created earlier. qbs qt5_10base-x64 If you open on of the file, say , you will notice a reference to a path. For some reason, in mine it’s . I guess I messed up somewhere since we should have a windows path. In any case we need to transform that path to the actual locations of Qt on our Linux machine, which is easy to do, just use . .qbs 1.10.0/profiles/msvc14-x64-qt/modules/Qt/gui/gui.qbs /usr/local/Qt-5.10.0 sed find -name "*.qbs" -exec sed -i -e 's\#/usr/local/Qt-5.10.0\#/home/cor3ntin/dev/cross-compilers/windows/qt-5.10-msvc-x64\#g' {} \; We then need to modify our to use those qt modules. Edit the QBS file created in part one to reference them: qbs.conf qt-project\qbs\profiles\msvc14-x86_64\preferences\qbsSearchPaths=/home/cor3ntin/dev/Qt/qbs-wine-toolchain,/home/cor3ntin/dev/cross-compilers/windows/qt5_10base-x64/qbs/1.10.0/profiles/msvc14-x64-qt I realize it’s all a bit tricky. Eventually though, we can run and it compiles our Qt-based hello world for Windows. qbs It won’t run because it can’t find the Qt dll. You can either copy the dll to the build directory, or make sure they are in the The windows/wine that is. PATH. PATH The only way I found to do that is to run — make sure to do it from the appropriate and add the location of the Qt’s bin directory to which is under . regedit WINEPREFIX Path HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Environment If you know a way to script that away, please let me know. Using regedit on Linux. What would I not do for my readers ? We also need to put a file next to our built helloworld.exe binary to tell Qt where to load the plugins from. In my case qt.conf [Paths]Prefix = /home/cor3ntin/dev/cross-compilers/windows/qt5_10base-x64/Plugins = plugins And that’s it ! It wasn’t too hard, was it ? I made a clicky thing ! And So, Microsoft Studio Visual C++ Compiler is the greatest thing ever ! A recent study conducted on two preschoolers shows that millennials like rainbows. I was immediately asked to made our app more rainbow-y. Ambiguously labeled buttons are apparently the horsemen of the pretend apocalypse so we will also get rid of them. What we need to do is iterate over our string an inject some html markup around each character so that they are render in different colors. Iterating over some container will require us to use . There is no other way. range-v3 literally Making WordArt Great Again. Isn’t that great ? But, and I’m sure you you will be utterly flabbergasted to learn that is not capable of compiling . I know, it’s a total blow, and a complete let down. msvc range-v3 Microsoft Studio Visual C++ Compiler Defeated. There is absolutely nothing we can do. It’s not like there exists a or to transform our string. Please stop saying I purposefully made up a contrived story just so I could use ranges and defeat msvc with rainbows. That would be . msvc-compatible port of [range-v3](https://github.com/Microsoft/Range-V3-VS2015) some other way mean The only reasonable thing is to ditch and replace it by something else. But what ? doesn’t understand the MSVC headers and libs, is quite expensive, is no more maintained. msvc Mingw icc Cfront By now, you certainly know where I’m coming at, don’t you ? ! If you didn’t know about , it’s a drop in replacement for except it’s actually clang, so it will make you all warm and fuzzy inside. clang-cl clang-cl cl.exe Clang was designed properly and it’s an amazing tool for a lot of reasons, but most importantly: It’s runs on all major OSes It doesn’t activate OS-specific features at compile time, but at runtime. Which means it will let you target anything from anywhere. It offers a driver ( a command line interface, if you like ) compatible with that of msvc It’s easy to build ( and if you ever attempted to build GCC, you know how hard building a compiler can be.) It’s open-source and its designed isn’t actively constrained by political motives. So, let’s use Clang ! If you don’t have follow the documentation of your Linux distribution, it should come with clang-cl by default ( it’s merely a symbolic link to clang ). clang Or if you are like me, checkout out and build the trunk, ! it’s full of goodness Beside being a drop in replacement, there are a few things we need to do. The toolchain module we wrote for wine does not quite work since it transforms slashes to backslashes. QBS I did copy the toolchain modules and fixed some other details. That will end up on GitHub soon. Creating a QBS profile for clang-cl is straight forward, copy the one from wine and change the toolchain name from to and point the to somewhere containing and . msvc clang-cl toolchainInstallPath clang-cl lld-link Oh, didn’t I mention ? It’s a drop in replacement for . is also a replacement for on unix, and it’s much, much faster than and so you should ! lld-link link.exe lld ld ld gold check it out and use it We are not quite done yet. Case consistency at Microsoft is a serious matter. Microsoft Windows is designed around case insensitive file systems. Which I’m sure looked like a good idea at the time. However, unless you are masochistic enough to run your Linux machine on , chances are your file-system is case sensitive. And that is an issue for us. FAT How bad it is, really ? Well… cl . ibahadmin.libwdsClientAPI. sapi. ibsensorsapi.lib etup . ib A UI L LIBP L S API L This is just a small selection of files. I don’t suppose there is anything they can do to fix that now, it’s too late. We could attempt to fix the case issues by changing the filename of every library and header. But that will probably not work since third party libraries aren’t consistent either. So even if we attempt to fix our build files sooner or later we will run on a case issue. So, the “proper” (for some definition of proper) solution would be to trick the Linux kernel into being case insensitive. And to that we need to use a case-insensitive system. Fortunately, a file can be a file system, so we will create a file large enough to hold the windows SDK, format it with a case-insensitive filesystem such as EXFAT and put the SDK there. Please note that NTFS is case sensitive, even if the Windows kernel is not. dd if=/dev/zero of=win_sdk_10.fs bs=1024 count=$((1024 * 100 * 3))mkfs.exfat win_sdk_10.fsmv sdk_10 sdk_10.bakmkdir sdk_10sudo mount win_sdk_10.fsmv sdk_10.bak/* sdk_10 You gotta love Linux. And now, compiling with clang-cl works. However, running the program exposes a bug. Our program compiles with clang and runs but it exhibits a nasty bug. And yet, the same executable copied to a virtual machine runs fine. Such greetings. I’m still not sure where the bug actually is. It appears to be either in range-v3 or my use thereof, and yet it seems odd that it would expose a different run-time behavior. But that’s what’s great about having a bigger set of development environments, if you have bugs, the are more likely to get exposed. For one, this nasty graphical glitch made me realized I should handle white spaces as a special case. Oh, and if you want to check what clang is actually doing, you can use Microsoft’s found in . This tool is equivalent of and for unix. dumpbin.exe msvc2017/bin/Hostx64/x64/ ldd nm Interestingly, the clang artifact looks exactly like a msvc-produced one, albeit with few extra sections. Including the CRT and the vcruntime ! Here is the MSVC built binary. Right now is and offers no support for debug info. is except for some exceptions handling. You can mix and match and . ldd-link still experimental clang-cl mostly done cl.exe clang-cl link.exe lld-link I can’t advise you to use in production (yet, it’s getting there ) but it’s an amazing tool to add to your CI and development environment. clang-cl It’s all I have for you today, I hope you’ve learned something! … One more thing … See you in Part 3 ! _This is Part 3 on my series about cross-compilation. You can check out Part 1 and Part 2 first !_medium.com A C++ Hello World And The Rose Gold Walled Garden Of Doom

A C++ Hello World And the Cute Heartless Rainbow

On June 20th, 2017 I launched a color contrast called , a small app that sits in your Mac’s menubar and yells at you if your color contrast isn’t good enough. tool Shade Here’s how things went ( they went okay!) tl;dr C’mon Medium, let’s work on that green. Shaking Things Up I left my role at in April of 2017 — the best job I’ve ever had ( !) — to pursue some side projects and figure out my source of motivation. I packed my bags and headed roughly 1.2 miles north to move apartments in the same town in New Jersey where I had lived for the past few years (Khan Academy ❤s remote, did I mention ?). Khan Academy they’re hiring they’re hiring After spending a few weeks catching up on some old video games, spending time with friends and family, and reorienting myself with a life where I don’t have to worry about a video page breaking, I decided it was time to scratch an itch and get to coding. First order of business: the contrast tool I’ve always wanted. — Contrary to this section’s title, I’m a creature of habit and things generally stayed the same. I still woke up at 7:30. Still made the same cup of mediocre Folgers instant coffee half its weight in creamer. Still wore the same black Calvin Klein T-shirt I wore everyday (don’t worry I have like 20 of them). Still , and still didn’t really know what I wanted to do. made an effort to leave my apartment But I didn’t need a plan, I just wanted to make something. So for the next 4 weeks, I spent roughly an hour a day sitting in front of my text editor, cramming as many technologies as I could into a small menubar app. Tech & Process I’m not big on process, but my rules for this project (or, rather, “experiment”) were as follows: Make something quick and cheap Find out the hard way if people will give you money for it So I spent my first day getting a simple React app and running (shout out to for making this painless) in an electron menubar app (shout out to for this one). nwb menubar About an hour later, it was up and running. I had no idea if the tech would stand the test of time, and quite frankly I didn’t really care (spoiler alert: the setup today is pretty much the same and it works fine). . Momentum was my priority I had a billion unknowns for this “experiment,” and cataloged them in a Trello board inspired by Rich Hickey’s . I categorized my board into and , and my process went as follows: Hammock Driven Development Things I Don’t Know Things I Know If an idea popped in my head (i.e. “How to remove dev dependencies from the build”) I would add it to More conceptual things, such as “Can this be a menubar app?” also went in this column. Things I Don’t Know. I would then continue my for the hour, then take a long break (usually a walk — again, ). work get out of your apartment When the current task at hand, whatever it was, was done — I would reorganize my and I’d either have an answer to questions from earlier (maybe through thinking or through code), or I would have uncovered more unknowns. Things I Don’t Know Things I Know. Over time grew, and gradually shrunk. This was a good feeling, and I made sure to relish in it. Things I Know Things I Don’t Know This went on for about three weeks, during which I had solicited some beta testers on twitter and sent out two waves of invites to try out the app. I also settled on a name and logo, but that stuff isn’t really important. Beta feedback went to, you guessed it, the column**.** Things I Don’t Know This work was generally very relaxed. A couple gnarly bugs popped up here and there, but for the most part (my #1 priority) at my desk or on the couch watching — a cowboy from Arizona who streams himself attempting to beat NES games as quickly as possible (I’m not kidding, Arcus’s stream is amazing and so very relaxing). In total I worked in front of a computer for about 20 hours, but in reality I spent double or triple that if you take into account the times I “took my work home with me.” I worked sustainably Arcus87 on Twitch7 Release Eventually I got to a point where I felt I knew everything I needed to know, with the exception of “Would people actually pay me for this thing?” A card titled just that sat alone in , and it was time to find out. Things I Don’t Know I spent the next week filling out some tax forms for Apple, put on some finishing touches, , designed some screenshots for the app store, and a couple dozen other things I hadn’t considered. I didn’t use Trello for this, but that wasn’t important. Momentum momentum momentum. made a landing page On the morning of June 20th, 2017, I got the email from Apple that Shade was ready for sale (I priced the app at $4.99 USD), and sent out the following tweet before hopping in my parents’ pool with my older brother. Response, Reflections, and Beyond Compared to previous projects I’ve “released,” the response for Shade has been…okay. Hacker News and Reddit didn’t take the bait, Product Hunt offered only a mild presence near the top, and word has spread primarily through my network (thanks to a few wonderful folks who shared it beyond my initial tweet ❤). Sales-wise, nothing extraordinary, but something I’m still very much proud of. I’m no growth expert, but I believe this is what’s known as “Great Potential For Hockey-Stick Growth.” To my nonexistent investors, sales for Shade have “increased in total at a promising yet declining rate” and “Q4 projections put us in the 8 or 9 figures.” After one week I’ve moved $258 worth of product, which amounts to $170 for me after you take out Apple’s cut. Enough to cover the fees I paid to establish my LLC, but not enough to cover Apple’s license or any of my other expenses. But this is money that I made. Not money I was given for showing up at work, money that people gave to me for a thing I created. That’s a very cool feeling, and I’m trying my best to not forget that. — On an additional personal note, it just feels good to have a thing out there that people are using. Answering support emails, prioritizing bugs and features for my next version of Shade, and figuring out ways to get this in front of more people are all exciting challenges that I haven’t a damn clue how to solve. There were plenty of moments where I wasn’t sure if Shade would sell, or if I even had the to charge money for this thing instead of selling it for GitHub stars, but I tried to keep true to my word: . Turns out at least 50 people would. guts Make something quick and find out the hard way if people would pay for it Above all else, I’m having a lot of fun. If at some point I can use this app or some other to help cover some of my expenses, even better. For now, I’ll just keep playing around with ideas, and try repeating and refining this process on a couple other tricks I have up my sleeve. — Feel free to follow me on twitter where I mostly tweet bad jokes and complain about technology. Please consider buying Shade , my rent is very expensive.

20 Hours of Work, $258 in Sales — The First Week of Shade

United States v. Apple INC Court Filing, retrieved on March 21, 2024 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 24 of 25. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here F. Sixth Claim for Relief: Violations of Wisconsin State Law 229. Plaintiff State of Wisconsin repeats and re-alleges and incorporates by reference every paragraph and allegation in this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 230. The aforementioned practices by Apple violate Wisconsin’s Antitrust Act, Wis. Stat. Ch. § 133.03 et seq. These violations substantially affect the people of Wisconsin and have impacts within the State of Wisconsin. 231. Plaintiff State of Wisconsin, through its Attorney General and under its antitrust enforcement authority in Wis. Stat. Ch. 133, is entitled to all remedies available under Wis. Stat. §§ 133.03, 133.16, 133.17, and 133.18. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on March 21, 2024, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. justice.gov

Apple Faces Allegations in Wisconsin: Accused of Antitrust Violations Impacting Consumers

United States v. Apple INC Court Filing, retrieved on March 21, 2024 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 20 of 25. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here B. Second Claim for Relief, in the Alternative: Attempted Monopolization of the Performance Smartphone Market in the United States in Violation of Sherman Act § 2 205. Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 204 above. 206. Performance smartphones in the United States is a relevant antitrust market, and Apple has attempted to monopolize that market. 207. Apple has attempted to monopolize the performance smartphone market in the United States through an exclusionary course of conduct and the anticompetitive acts described herein. Each of Apple’s actions individually and collectively increased Apple’s market power in the performance smartphone market. 208. Apple’s anticompetitive acts include, but are not limited to, its contractual restrictions against app creation, distribution, and access to APIs that have impeded apps and technologies including, but not limited to, super apps, cloud streaming, messaging, wearables, and digital wallets. The areas identified in this complaint reflect a non-exhaustive list of recent anticompetitive acts but as technology advances, both the technologies impeded and the specific manner of impediment may shift in response to technological and regulatory change consistent with Apple’s past conduct. 209. While each of Apple’s acts is anticompetitive in its own right, Apple’s interrelated and interdependent actions have had a cumulative and self-reinforcing effect that has harmed competition and the competitive process. 210. In undertaking this course of conduct, Apple has acted with specific intent to monopolize, and to destroy effective competition in, the performance smartphone market in the United States. There is a dangerous probability that, unless restrained, Apple will succeed in monopolizing the performance smartphone market in the United States, in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on March 21, 2024, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. justice.gov

DOJ Accuses Apple of Anticompetitive Conduct in the Smartphone Market

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 94 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XLIX: VIOLATIONS OF RHODE ISLAND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT, R.I. GEN. L. §§ 6-13.1-1 TO 6-13.1-10 1133. The State of Rhode Island incorporates and realleges each of the paragraphs 1 through 850 as if fully set forth herein. 1134. The Rhode Island Deceptive Trade Practices Act (RI DTPA) makes unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce unlawful. R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-2. 1135. The RI DTPA defines “unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts or practices” as, among other things, “conduct that . . . creates a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding,” “any other methods, acts, or practices that mislead or deceive members of the public in a material respect,” and “any act or practice that is unfair or deceptive to the consumer.” R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-1(6)(xii), (xiv), (xiii). 1136. Any person, firm, or corporation who violates the RI DTPA is liable for a civil penalty up to $10,000 for each violation. R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-8. 1137. Meta’s acts or practices enumerated in the foregoing paragraphs have been in the conduct of trade or commerce, directly or indirectly, in Rhode Island. 1138. As alleged herein, Meta made representations including that Meta’s Social Media Platforms are not designed to harm young users or to induce compulsive use, that Meta’s Social Media Platforms are less addictive than they actually are, that the incidence of negative user experiences was lower than it actually was, that Meta was not prioritizing profit maximization over young users’ well-being when it was, that Meta effectively excluded under-13 users when its safeguards were insufficient, that Meta complied with federal laws and regulations related to the exclusion of under-13 users when it did not, and that Meta did not collect user data for the purpose of causing addiction to its Social Media Platforms when it had such a purpose. These representations constitute conduct that creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding and that deceive and mislead members of the public regarding Meta’s Social Media Platforms. R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-1(6)(xii), (xiii), (xiv). 1139. Similarly, as alleged herein, Meta is engaging in unfair acts to consumers, including implementing psychologically manipulative, engagement-inducing features that harm consumers and targeting young users despite knowing their specific vulnerability to compulsive and unhealthy platform use. These unfair acts constitute conduct that is especially unfair to younger users. R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-1(6)(xiii). 1140. Meta’s acts or practices, both past and continuing, are immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and substantially injurious to Rhode Island consumers. Pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1-2 and § 6-13.1-5, the acts, practices, representations, and omissions of Meta described herein are unlawful, violate the prohibition against unfair or deceptive acts or practices found in RI DTPA, and restraint of these practices is in the public interest. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com Lead image by Dima Solomin on Unsplash

Meta Accused of Violating Rhode Island Deceptive Trade Practices Act

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 93 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XLVIII: UNFAIR ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW (UTPCPL) 1127. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania realleges and incorporates herein by reference each of the paragraphs 1 through 850 as if fully set forth herein. 1128. At all relevant times set forth herein, Meta has engaged in trade and commerce pursuant to 73 P.S. § 201-2(3) of the UTPCPL, in connection with its sale and advertisement of merchandise. 1129. Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce as defined by subclauses (i) through (xxi) of section 201-2(4) of the UTPCPL are declared unlawful, and whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any person is using or is about to use any method, act, or practice declared unlawful, section 201- 4 of the UTPCPL authorizes the Attorney General to bring an action against such person to restrain these methods, acts, or practices. 1130. The acts and practices described in paragraphs 1 through 850 constitute unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as prohibited by section 201-3 of the UTPCPL as defined by subclause 201-2(4)(xxi) of section 201-2(4) as follows: Engaging in any other fraudulent or deceptive conduct which creates a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding, 73 P.S. § 201-2(4)(xxi). 1131. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania alleges that all of the practices described above were performed willfully. Accordingly, and pursuant to section 201-8 of the UTPCPL, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania seeks the imposition of civil penalties of One Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000.00) for each violation of the UTPCPL in addition to other relief sought, as appropriate. 1132. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania believes that the public interest is served by seeking before this Court a permanent injunction to restrain the methods, acts and practices described herein, as well as seeking restitution and civil penalties for violation of the law. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania believes that citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania are suffering and will continue to suffer harm unless the acts and practices complained of herein are permanently enjoined. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Meta Accused of Unfair Trade Practices by Pennsylvania Attorney General

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 77 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XXXII: UNCONSCIONABLE ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE NEBRASKA UNIFORM DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1041. The State of Nebraska realleges and incorporates herein each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 850 as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 1042. The NE UDTPA prohibits unconscionable acts or practices by a supplier in connection with a consumer transaction. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 87-303.01. 1043. As described in preceding paragraphs and summarized in Section XI.B, Meta is a supplier and has engaged in unconscionable trade practices in connection with a consumer transaction in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 87-303.01. 1044. Each unconscionable act or practice, as alleged herein, constitutes a separate violation of the NE CPA and the NE UDTPA. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

The State of Nebraska Accuses Meta of UDTPA Violations

This story was originally published on by by and . ProPublica Jennifer Smith Richards Jodi S. Cohen Prosecutors in Illinois have dropped at least 15 court cases that hinged on the word of a former Chicago police officer who’s now charged with perjury and forgery after he got dozens of traffic tickets dismissed by testifying each time that his girlfriend had stolen his car. Jeffrey Kriv is accused of lying under oath 44 times to get out of speeding, parking and red light camera tickets involving his personal vehicles. In his 26 years as a Chicago officer, Kriv was known for being one of the city’s most prolific drunken-driving enforcers, which means many more pending cases in which he was an arresting officer could be in peril. The most recent DUI arrests he made involve allegations of dangerous driving. On just one morning this month, an assistant state’s attorney made motions declining to prosecute seven cases where Kriv was the arresting officer, some of which dated to 2021. The assistant state’s attorney offered no reason, but in court, defense attorneys mentioned Kriv’s alleged credibility issues. “This is the officer who has been charged with a felony,” one defense lawyer told Judge Chloe Pedersen after his client’s DUI case was called. “This is a Kriv matter,” another defense attorney said as his client’s case was dismissed. While Kriv retired in January just before he was charged criminally, he had faced nearly 100 misconduct complaints from citizens and fellow officers in his tenure on the force. ProPublica and the Chicago Tribune previously detailed Kriv’s long history of alleged . misconduct as an officer and his current legal trouble Prosecutors charged him in January with four counts of perjury and five counts of forgery, all felonies, in connection with four of the traffic tickets he accrued. He has pleaded not guilty. The Chicago Police Department knew in early 2022 that the Office of Inspector General was investigating Kriv for lying to get out of tickets. Then, on Oct. 28, the state’s attorney’s office added Kriv to its list of officers whose credibility issues meant the office would not call them to testify in criminal cases, sometimes called the do-not-call list. But the Police Department would not answer ProPublica when asked why it kept Kriv on the streets until January, when it stripped him of police powers. In those few months, Kriv made two dozen arrests and issued seven traffic citations, according to Police Department records obtained by ProPublica. He was the primary arresting officer in 18 of those cases; charges already have been dropped in seven of them. A spokesperson for the Police Department declined to comment. The state’s attorney’s office said there are 10 pending felony cases in which Kriv was the arresting officer. Two cases filed after he was put on the do-not-call list are moving forward; the other eight cases remain under review, a spokesperson said. There may be other cases — most of them likely misdemeanor DUIs — involving Kriv that are still pending. The state’s attorney’s office said it does not track misdemeanors, and the Cook County clerk’s office and chief judge’s office also said they did not have that information. Most DUI cases are misdemeanors, however, and Kriv regularly made about 100 arrests a year on DUI charges, according to annual counts published by an anti-drunken-driving group. Kriv estimated last year that hundreds of his cases might be awaiting an outcome. Kriv’s attorney, Tim Grace, told reporters that he and his client would not comment for this story, though Kriv has twice emailed reporters to defend himself against misconduct complaints and call ProPublica’s reporting biased, including in an email last week. In a 2,000-word email sent in June, he said that he had nearly 150 honorable mentions and two life-saving awards and was consistently one of the city’s top arresting officers for DUI charges. He also criticized other officers, a judge and the Police Department as a whole. “I’ve been on the job for 27 years and I was a worker. Any officer that works will get complaints. Some false, some true,” Kriv wrote. “I could do what many, many officers do and that would be nothing.” Kriv also sent a strongly worded email to a prosecutor last November, while he was still working as a police officer, after he learned he would not be allowed to testify about arrests he made. In the email, he defended his honesty and threatened to “not go out of my way to arrest people for DUI” going forward. “My reputation as a Chicago Police Officer is immaculate and all my testimony on any case that I have been involved in is spot on,” he wrote to Assistant State’s Attorney Emily Leuin, after calling her a coward. ProPublica obtained the email through a public records request. “Go ahead and dismiss my cases where someone was seriously hurt because the offender was drunk. This is something you have to live with but by all accounts, you obviously have no qualms about doing so. I’m sure [anti-drunk-driving groups] will like to know what is going on with the dozens, if not hundreds of cases of mine that are currently pending an outcome,” he wrote. The beginning of an email that Kriv sent to Assistant State’s Attorney Emily Leuin. Credit: Obtained by ProPublica. Redacted by ProPublica Leuin did not respond to a request for comment. Despite his threats, Kriv did make DUI arrests for the rest of his tenure as an officer. He arrested a Chicago man in December 2022 after he said he watched the driver go the wrong way on a one-way street and then go through a stop sign. “Very strong odor of alcoholic beverage on breath, slurred/thick-tongued speech, glassy eyes, confused,” Kriv wrote in the charging documents. That case was dismissed in April. Other cases, meanwhile, are moving forward despite Kriv’s indictment. In traffic court this month, defense attorney Steve Roach asked the prosecutor whether Kriv, who made the arrest, would be subpoenaed in his client’s DUI case. The prosecutor said no, leaving Roach to wonder how the state could continue with its case. “Because you’ve got a primary arresting officer who has an indictment against him which involves questions of one’s honesty, I wouldn’t be playing games with these cases,” Roach said in an interview. The Cook County public defender’s office is representing several people in Kriv’s arrest cases. A spokesperson said that in cases the state continues to pursue, the office will demand trials and the state will have to decide whether to make its cases without Kriv. The collapse of Kriv’s cases shares some similarities with the problematic DUI arrests made by Chicago police officer John Haleas nearly 20 years ago. Even after the police administration confirmed that Haleas had falsified reports in DUI arrests, he remained on duty. (In fact, he is still a Chicago police officer, though he was later convicted of attempted obstruction of justice and the department tried to fire him.) There’s also a key difference between Haleas and Kriv: how the state’s attorney has reacted to pending court cases. The state’s attorney dismissed more than 150 of Haleas’ pending cases when he was found to have lied. The state’s attorney’s office in July made public its list of officers in Cook County who it has barred from testifying in criminal cases — more than 300 officers in all, the vast majority of them from the Chicago Police Department. About 60 officers were added this year, and the office adopted a new policy last month that spells out prosecutors’ duty to disclose its problematic witnesses to defendants. “The culture that allowed disreputable law enforcement officers to testify in court propelled Cook County’s reputation as the wrongful conviction capital of the country,” State’s Attorney Kim Foxx said in a press release about the disclosure list. Chicago has a long history of scandalous cops whose cases fell apart when their own corruption or misdeeds were revealed. Over the years, officials have grappled with how to handle the fallout in court, as well as what to disclose to defendants and the public about these cases. A spokesperson for the state’s attorney’s office said the list of officers with credibility issues is public and that disclosures to defendants would be made when evidence is typically shared. ProPublica contacted more than a dozen defense attorneys currently representing clients arrested by Kriv, and only one said he had been notified by a prosecutor that Kriv was barred from testifying. Other lawyers were unaware that Kriv would not be called as a witness. One said the state’s attorney’s office had left his case “in limbo” and he is skeptical that the prosecutor can mount a case without Kriv. “Every time I show up, the state’s attorney doesn’t know what’s going on,” said defense attorney Marco Rodriguez, who is representing a client in a DUI case. Among the Kriv cases that have been dismissed is one from October 2022 involving a woman who was idling in a crosswalk but asleep, according to Kriv’s police report. He noted in the report that there was vomit on the car seat and on the woman’s pants. Her blood alcohol content was 0.19%, more than twice the legal limit to drive, according to the report, obtained through a public records request. Prosecutors dropped the case against her in March. Even in his last weeks as a police officer, Kriv arrested at least five people over four days on DUI charges, including a 41-year-old driver he said he’d found on Dec. 10 passed out behind the wheel of his running Honda Accord in the middle of a dead-end street. The man “seemed confused” and the “whole front end” of his car was damaged and the tires shredded. Kriv noted that the driver had an explanation for the car’s damage. He wrote that the man “stated his car was like that from his girlfriend as it was her fault previously.” That case also has been dismissed. Photo by on Giammarco Boscaro Unsplash

Prosecutors Were Forced to Drop Cases Because They Were Linked to Ex-Cop Accused of Perjury

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 70 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XXV: VIOLATION OF THE MICHIGAN CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, MICH. COMP. LAWS § 445.901 et seq. 996. The State of Michigan, by and through Attorney General Dana Nessel, realleges and reaffirms each and every allegation set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 997. The State of Michigan brings this claim under the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA), asserting claims under § 3(1) of the MCPA, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 445.903(1), which protects Michigan residents against “[u]nfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce.” 998. The Attorney General has provided sufficient notice and is authorized to bring this claim pursuant to Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.905 and 445.911, as well as her parens patriae authority. 999. At all relevant times, Meta was engaged in the conduct of trade or commerce as that term is defined at Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.902(1)(g). 1000. The allegations set forth above comprise violations of the following subsections of the MCPA, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.903(1): (a) Causing a probability of confusion or misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services. (b) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do not have or that a person has sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection that he or she does not have. (e) Representing that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model, if they are of another. (s) Failing to reveal a material fact, the omission of which tends to mislead or deceive the consumer, and which fact could not reasonably be known by the consumer. (bb) Making a representation of fact or statement of fact material to the transaction such that a person reasonably believes the represented or suggested state of affairs to be other than it actually is. (cc) Failing to reveal facts that are material to the transaction in light of representations of fact made in a positive manner. 1001. Specifically, Meta violated § 3(1)(a) by knowingly and intentionally causing confusion about its services’ approval through, inter alia, the publication of CSER reports [Redacted], and through other communications, suggesting that the incidence or prevalence of negative or harmful user experiences on Meta’s Social Media Platforms was lower than it actually was. 1002. For the same reason, Meta violated § 3(1)(b) by misrepresenting its goods or services’ characteristics, uses, and benefits by, inter alia, knowingly and intentionally publishing CSER reports [Redacted], and through other communications, suggesting that the incidence or prevalence of negative or harmful user experiences on Meta’s Social Media Platforms was lower than it actually was. 1003. Meta violated § 3(1)(s) by failing to reveal the above-described material facts and other known or suspected realities regarding the negative or harmful user experiences on Meta’s Social Media Platforms, which misled consumers and could not have been reasonably known by them, in part because consumers lack access to Meta’s internal data and metrics. 1004. Meta violated § 3(1)(bb) through representations and statements of fact material to users’ decision to use Meta’s Social Media Platforms by routinely publishing misleading reports boasting a deceptively low incidence of user harms, deceptively representing that targeted features of its platforms are not manipulative or otherwise designed to promote young users’ prolonged and unhealthy engagement with social media, and misrepresenting that its platforms are designed and maintained to ensure safe experiences for young users. 1005. Meta violated § 3(1)(cc) by making representations of fact in a positive manner, i.e., making statements through published reports and otherwise to the effect that targeted features of its platforms are not manipulative or otherwise designed to promote young users’ prolonged and unhealthy engagement with social media, and that its platforms are designed and maintained to ensure safe experiences for young users. It failed to reveal facts material to the users’ transaction with Meta [Redacted] the revealing of which would have been material to users’ decision to engage with the platforms. 1006. Individual consumers have suffered damages as a result of Meta’s conduct. Again, all of the allegations regarding Meta’s practices apply to tens of thousands of Michigan residents. 1007. Meta’s violations of the MCPA were persistent, knowing, and willful. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Michigan Attorney General Accuses Meta of Willfully Violating the Consumer Protection Act

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 65 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XX: DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE KANSAS CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, K.S.A. § 50-626 974. The State of Kansas, ex rel. Kris W. Kobach, Attorney General, realleges and incorporates herein by reference each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 850 as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 975. Meta is or was during all relevant times a “supplier” who in the ordinary course of business, solicits, engages in or enforces “consumer transactions,” whether or not dealing directly with the consumer, as those terms are defined in K.S.A. § 50-624 of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). 976. In numerous instances, in connection with a consumer transaction, Meta engaged in deceptive acts or practices as alleged and described herein, specifically including the conduct described in paragraphs 1 through 850, in violation of K.S.A. § 50-626. 977. Each of Meta’s deceptive acts or practices as alleged herein, constitute a separate violation of K.S.A. § 50-626. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Kansas Attorney General Targets Meta: Accuses Tech Giant of Violating Consumer Protection Act

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 61 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XVI: UNFAIR ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE ILLINOIS CONSUMER FRAUD AND DECEPTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES ACT, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq. 949. The People of the State of Illinois reallege and incorporate herein by reference each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-850 above as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 950. Meta, in the course of trade or commerce, engaged in unfair acts and practices that caused young users’ compulsive and unhealthy use of and addiction to Meta’s Social Media Platforms, including by: a. Targeting its Social Media Platforms to young users while knowingly designing its Social Media Platforms to include features that Meta knew to be psychologically and physically harmful to young users—including features known to promote compulsive, prolonged, and unhealthy use by young users; b. Utilizing Social Media Platform features that unfairly harm young users independently of any actions taken by third-party users of Meta’s Platforms. These features include infinite scroll, ephemeral content features, autoplay, quantification and display of Likes, and disruptive alerts, all of which were unfairly utilized by Meta to extract additional time and attention from young users whose developing brains were not equipped to resist those manipulative tactics; c. Designing, developing, and deploying disruptive audiovisual and vibration notifications and alerts and ephemeral content features in a way that unfairly exploited young users’ psychological vulnerabilities and cultivated a sense of “fear of missing out” in order to induce young users to spend more time than they would otherwise choose on Meta’s Social Media Platforms; d. Algorithmically serving content to young users according to “variable reinforcement schedules,” thereby manipulating dopamine releases in young users, unfairly inducing them to engage repeatedly with its products—much like a gambler at a slot machine; and e. Collecting the personal information of under-13 users of Instagram and Facebook without first obtaining verifiable parental consent. 951. Meta’s deployment of manipulative and harmful features, both on their own and especially in combination, for use by young users is an unfair act or practice. 952. At all relevant times, Meta had a thorough understanding of the mental and physical harms and addiction suffered by young users of its Platforms. Instead of taking adequate measures to mitigate these damaging effects, Meta turned a blind eye to them, and persisted in exploiting young users’ psychological vulnerabilities. Meta’s acts and practices alleged herein are immoral, unethical, oppressive, and unscrupulous, including because they constitute knowing decisions causing unnecessary and unjustified harm to young users for Meta’s financial gain. 953. Meta’s acts and practices alleged herein also have caused and continue to cause substantial injury to consumers that could not be reasonably avoided. Young users could not have reasonably avoided injuries resulting from Meta’s acts and practices, including because Meta misrepresented and failed to disclose the dangerous nature of its Social Media Platforms and because Meta utilized psychologically manipulative engagement-inducing features, knowing that young users are especially susceptible to those psychologically manipulative tactics. 954. Meta’s acts and practices, including Meta’s actions taken to encourage young users’ compulsive and unhealthy use of and addiction to its Social Media Platforms, are offensive to public policy, as defined by statute and common law. The Illinois legislature has expressed a public policy goal of protecting youth from the harms of addiction and related afflictions. See, e.g., Juvenile Court Act of 1987, Article IV (“Addicted Minors”), 705 ILCS 405/4-1 et seq.; Juvenile Drug Court Treatment Act, 705 ILCS 410 (recognizing public policy goal of reducing juvenile addiction to drugs); Illinois Gambling Act, 230 ILCS 10 et seq. (recognizing policy issues related to “[c]ompulsive gambling” and prohibiting minors from casino gambling). The protection of minors from the dangers of addiction is a well-established objective underlying public policy in Illinois; Meta’s acts and practices alleged herein, including Meta’s actions taken to encourage young users’ compulsive and unhealthy use of and addiction to its Social Media Platforms, are therefore offensive to public policy. 955. In addition, the public policy of protecting youth’s private information and requiring parental consent prior to collecting this information is established in COPPA and the COPPA Rule. 956. By engaging in the acts and practices alleged herein, Meta engaged in unfair acts or practices declared unlawful under Section 2 of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (Illinois Consumer Fraud Act), 815 ILCS 505/2, which states in relevant part: Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including but not limited to the use or employment of any deception fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or the concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact, with intent that others rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact, or the use or employment of any practice described in Section 2 of the “Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act”, approved August 5, 1965, in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful whether any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Illinois Launches Legal Offensive: Meta Accused of Fostering Addiction in Young Users

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 57 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XII: DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF GEORGIA FAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES ACT, O.C.G.A. § 10-1-390 et seq. 919. The State of Georgia, by and through Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General of the State of Georgia, realleges and incorporates herein by reference each of the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 920. Prior to initiating this proceeding under the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act (FBPA), the State of Georgia, by and through the Attorney General and his designees, complied with O.C.G.A. § 10-1-397(c). 921. The State of Georgia, by and through the Attorney General, is authorized pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 10-1-397(b)(2) to initiate this action, which may be brought in federal district court pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 10-1-397.1. 922. Meta’s consumer acts or practices are or were conducted in “trade” or “commerce,” as those terms are defined in O.C.G.A. § 10-1-392(a)(28) of the FBPA, in whole or in part in the State of Georgia. 923. Meta and each Defendant are or were during all relevant times engaged in the conduct of “consumer acts or practices,” as that term is defined in O.C.G.A. § 10-1-392(a)(7) of the FBPA, in whole or in part in the State of Georgia. 924. While engaged in consumer acts or practices in trade or commerce, Meta is using, has used, and/or is about to use the following deceptive methods, acts, and practices in whole or in part in the State of Georgia, including through the means described in paragraph 846. 925. Meta’s aforesaid methods, acts, and practices are deceptive and are thus unlawful under the FBPA, including O.C.G.A. § 10-1-393(a) and (b). 926. The State of Georgia, by and through the Attorney General, is authorized to bring this action whether or not any person has actually been misled by Meta’s deceptive methods, acts, and practices. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

State of Georgia Accuses Meta of Deceptive Practices Violating Fair Business Laws

Elon Musk, on Tuesday 11/21/2023, served another curve ball in the winding tale of In the tweet below, Musk shares a link to a now-deleted GitHub post—a “Letter of Concerns” to the OpenAI board by Ex-employees of the company. OpenAI’s evolving leadership. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1727096607752282485?embedable=true The letter alleges that Sam Altman, the CEO, engaged in misconduct, abuse of power, and other unethical practices. Please find the letter’s content below: To the Board of Directors of OpenAl: We are writing to you today to express our deep concern about the recent events at OpenAl, particularly the allegations of misconduct against Sam Altman. We are former OpenAl employees who left the company during a period of significant turmoil and upheaval. As you have now witnessed what happens when you dare stand up to Sam Altman, perhaps you can understand why so many of us have remained silent for fear of repercussions. We can no longer stand by silent. We believe that the Board of Directors has a duty to investigate these allegations thoroughly and take appropriate action. We urge you to: Expand the scope of Emmett's investigation to include an examination of Sam Altman's actions since August 2018, when OpenAl began transitioning from a non-profit to a for-profit entity. Issue an open call for private statements from former OpenAl employees who resigned, were placed on medical leave, or were terminated during this period. Protect the identities of those who come forward to ensure that they are not subjected to retaliation or other forms of harm. We believe that a significant number of OpenAl employees were pushed out of the company to facilitate its transition to a for-profit model. This is evidenced by the fact that OpenAl's employee attrition rate between January 2018 and July 2020 was in the order of 50%. Throughout our time at OpenAl, we witnessed a disturbing pattern of deceit and manipulation by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, driven by their insatiable pursuit of achieving artificial general intelligence (AGl). Their methods, however, have raised serious doubts about their true intentions and the extent to which they genuinely prioritize the benefit of all humanity. Many of us, initially hopeful about OpenAl's mission, chose to give Sam and Greg the benefit of the doubt. However, as their actions became increasingly concerning, those who dared to voice their concerns were silenced or pushed out. This systematic silencing of dissent created an environment of fear and intimidation, effectively stifling any meaningful discussion about the ethical implications of OpenAl's work. We provide concrete examples of Sam and Greg's dishonesty & manipulation including: Sam's demand for researchers to delay reporting progress on specific "secret" research initiatives, which were later dismantled for failing to deliver sufficient results quickly enough. Those who questioned this practice were dismissed as"bad culture fits" and even terminated, some just before Thanksgiving 2019. Greg's use of discriminatory language against a gender-transitioning team member. Despite many promises to address this issue, no meaningful action was taken, except for Greg simply avoiding all communication with the affected individual, effectively creating a hostile work environment. This team member was eventually terminated for alleged underperformance. Sam directing IT and Operations staff to conduct investigations into employees, including Ilya, without the knowledge or consent of management. Sam's discreet, yet routine exploitation of OpenAl's non-profit resources to advance his personal goals, particularly motivated by his grudge against Elon following their falling out. The Operations team's tacit acceptance of the special rules that applied to Greg, navigating intricate requirements to avoid being blacklisted. Brad Lightcap's unfulfilled promise to make public the documents detailing OpenAl's capped-profit structure and the profit cap for each investor. Sam's incongruent promises to research projects for compute quotas, causing internal distrust and infighting. Despite the mounting evidence of Sam and Greg's transgressions, those who remain at OpenAl continue to blindly follow their leadership, even at significant personal cost. This unwavering loyalty stems from a combination of fear of retribution and the allure of potential financial gains through OpenAl's profit participation units. The governance structure of OpenAl, specifically designed by Sam and Greg, deliberately isolates employees from overseeing the for-profit operations, precisely due to their inherent conflicts of interest. This opaque structure enables Sam and Greg to operate with impunity, shielded from accountability. We urge the Board of Directors of OpenAl to take a firm stand against these unethical practices and launch an independent investigation into Sam and Greg's conduct. We believe that OpenAl's mission is too important to be compromised by the personal agendas of a few individuals. We implore you, the Board of Directors, to remain steadfast in your commitment to OpenAl's original mission and not succumb to the pressures of profit-driven interests. The future of artificial intelligence and the well-being of humanity depend on your unwavering commitment to ethical leadership and transparency. Sincerely, Concerned Former OpenAl Employees Lead image by Andrew Neel on Unsplash

Elon Musk Shares Letter by Ex OpenAI Staff Accusing Sam Altman of "Dishonesty & Manipulation"

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 56 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT XI: VIOLATIONS OF THE DELAWARE DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT (Delaware DTPA), 6 Del. Code Ann. § 2531 et seq. 911. The State of Delaware, ex rel. Kathleen Jennings, Attorney General, incorporates and realleges each of the paragraphs 1 through 850 as if fully set forth herein. 912. The Delaware DTPA, 6 Del. Code Ann. § 2531 et seq., prohibits a business from engaging in conduct which creates a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding. 913. Meta and each Defendant are “person[s]” engaged in a business, trade or commerce in the State of Delaware within the meaning of § 2531 of the Delaware DTPA. 914. As described in paragraphs 1 to 850 of the Complaint, Meta has engaged in conduct which created the likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding. 915. Meta represented that its goods and/or services had approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they did not have in violation of 6 Del. Code Ann. § 2532 (a)(5). 916. Meta advertised goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised in violation of 6 Del. Code Ann. § 2532(a)(9). 917. Meta engaged in a series of conduct, described in paragraph 846 which similarly create a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding. 6 Del. Code Ann. § 2532(a)(12). 918. Meta’s actions constituted willful violations of the Delaware DTPA because they knew or should have known that its conduct was prohibited by that statute. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Delaware DTPA Battle: Attorney General Accuses Meta of Misleading Conduct and Violations

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 54 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT IX: VIOLATIONS OF THE CONNECTICUT UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT, CONNECTICUT GENERAL STATUTES § 42-110b et seq. 893. At all relevant times, Meta was engaged in trade or commerce in Connecticut pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes (Conn. Gen. Stat.) § 42-110b(a). 894. The State of Connecticut realleges and incorporates herein by reference each allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs 1 through 850. 895. The State of Connecticut alleges that the aforesaid acts and practices in paragraph 846 constitute deceptive acts or practices in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b(a). 896. The State of Connecticut alleges that the aforesaid acts and practices of Meta in paragraphs 847 through 850 offend public policy pertaining to the protection of minors from the harms of addiction as well as protecting the privacy and safety of minors online as embodied in COPPA. 897. The State of Connecticut alleges that the aforesaid acts and practices of Meta in paragraphs 847 to 850 are oppressive, unethical, immoral, and unscrupulous. 898. Meta’s conduct substantially harmed Connecticut consumers in that Meta’s unfair acts and omissions caused young Connecticut users’ compulsive and unhealthy use of and addiction to Meta’s Social Media Platforms which resulted in mental and physical harms, as alleged in paragraphs 847 through 850. 899. Meta’s acts and practices, as described herein, therefore constitute unfair acts or practices in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b(a). 900. Meta knew, or should have known, that its conduct was unfair or deceptive in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b, and as a consequence Meta is subject to civil penalties of not more than $5,000 per violation pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110o(b). Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Meta Accused of Harms to Connecticut Users in Unfair Trade Practices Case

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 48 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT III: FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS BY META IN VIOLATION OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17500 (BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA) 865. The People of the State of California (California) reallege and incorporate herein by reference each of the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs 1 through 859 as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 866. From a date unknown to California and continuing to the present, Meta has engaged in and continues to engage in acts or practices that constitute violations of California Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq., by making or causing to be made untrue or misleading statements with the intent to induce members of the public to use Meta’s platforms when such statements were likely to mislead members of the public about the nature and safety of Meta’s platforms. Meta’s untrue or misleading representations include, but are not limited to, the representations described in paragraph 846. 867. At the time the untrue or misleading representations were made, Meta knew or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known that the representations were untrue or misleading. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

The Pursuit of Veracity: California Accuses Meta of Touting Falsehoods

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 44 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here XI. SUMMARY OF META’S DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR OR UNCONSCIONABLE ACTS AND PRACTICES A. Deceptive Acts and Practices 846. Meta engaged in the following deceptive acts and practices, with the intent that consumers rely on the deceptive acts and practices: a. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that its Social Media Platforms are not psychologically or physically harmful for young users and are not designed to induce young users’ compulsive and extended use, when they are in fact so designed; b. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that its Social Media Platforms are less addictive and/or less likely to result in psychological and physical harm for young users than its Social Media Platforms are in reality; c. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, through the publication of CSER reports and [Redacted], and through other communications, that the incidence or prevalence of negative or harmful user experiences on Meta’s Social Media Platforms was lower than it actually was; d. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication that it prioritized young users’ health and safety over maximizing profits, when in fact Meta subordinated young user health and safety to its goal of maximizing profits by prolonging young users’ time spent on its Social Media Platforms; e. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication that Meta prevents under-13 users from using Instagram and/or Facebook when in fact Meta was aware that it does not prevent under-13 users from using Instagram and Facebook; f. Meta misrepresented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication that Meta’s collection of user data was not for the purpose of causing those users to become addicted to the Social Media Platforms, when in reality that was one of the purposes for which Meta collected user data; g. Meta has made other false and deceptive representations, including as set forth in paragraphs 1 through 835. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Stories, News & Mentions about ARCUS

Arcus’s Stories on HackerNoon