rando3826

And so I will continue to avoid C++ because I'm not a master and will not avoid the many pitfals, and I want to get things done, not become a master of C++.

The answer to both questions is yes. The talent pool and cost of developer talent is significantly impacted by a company's reputation, including it's activities in the free/open source arena. Also, your question include a false presumption in "buy the talent it needs", every software company seeks to optimize talent/cost, it doesn't simply have a binary "needed quota filled." Perhaps it doesn't affect it enough yet for them to rationally stop their nasty behaviour, and that is a better question.

> if you come to me and say 'our art pipeline sucks, it's too inefficient' and then walk away, I literally have nothing at all to work on.

The 'art pipeline' might be something you could work on...

Agree. Would love to hear from someone who uses this while working at their computer, and someone who uses it for viewing media on the tv.

There is nothing more costly about providing open internet than closed internet. If you only look at certain domains, those domains will subsidize the price. It's pushing two things unnecarily into one. It's like, if you can pay for internet if you sell your kidney, then saying internet access with kidneys is too expensive.

Lol, took me a minute to get the sarcasm.

Meh, your both wrong. When appropriate, doctors do ask about diet, they do recommend changes to diet, it does make a difference, and being healthy is not necessarily simple.

The first link describes it as "D news aggregator, newsgroup client, web newsreader and IRC bot." I don't see anything about mailing list. And at first, I thought the D part meant that was customized to be just for the D project's uses. But thinking about it, it sounds like it's because it was written in D?

Agree, except that the underpinning is about about the freedom to improve and share, which generally means there's a freely available version on the internet, but by no means means you can't or shouldn't buy electronic or paper copies for money to support the author. ie. the gnu make manual: http://shop.fsf.org/product/gnu-make-version-381/

Great. The thing I like is that you get maximum flexibility, and good web interface. For example: I run a mail server which handles mail for some subdomains, and the root domain mail I route through them. Every time I give an email out to a company, I name it company-name@one-of-many-short-fastmail-domains.com. I never have to worry about spam from those email address, as I can filter and cycle those at will.

I highly doubt it. And I doubt they will patch it.

But it's impossible. If I'm logging your keystrokes, game over. Unless you add some firmware to do dsa encryption in your brain, and become very fast at typing cyphertext.

Proper HTTPS is secure at MITM attacks. HTTPS can be MITMed if the certs or local systems have been breached. But the MITM is just a byproduct of a different failure. Absolutely any secure communication protocol has to be honored by both parties for it to be secure.

> he found himself unable to adapt a new Xerox printer with a program he’d created to alert users to paper jams

And still I can't go to an average computer store, buy a printer which is powered by free software so I could customize it like this. We have a long way to go. First to mind: the respects your freedom campaign needs to grow to more hardware.

> still have a 1/2 chance of winning by switching

It seems that you are referring to the other variant, in which case this is false, because that one has a 2/3 chance of winning by switching.

Welcome to the world of patents.

Hi, I see you'd like to start a quest into the dark heart of our corporate bureaucracy to join the other .0001% of customers who aren't having their privacy violated. We respect you. We love you (feel free to share that via social media). Welcome, and good luck.

Fuck you (I'm extraordinary)

What are C=D years?

Not at all obvious to the investors who value these companies at tens and hundreds of billions of dollars. They don't expect them to dissapear in 5-10 years

Your reply was in reference to the future, so it's logical for a reader to assume that's what you were talking about.

> If specialized apps start to show up, people may start ditching FB altogether.

> we wouldn't dream of not being on FB

And 10 years ago I wouldn't dream of not having my ICQ friends. Your dreams are not the /most/ relevant.

Yes, I will blame them. You make no compelling case otherwise. This is how the internet works. If you run a server with security vunls that are well known and patches available: it gets owned. It's your fault. Same type of situation here.

This. Seriously: a company makes a product which has the ability to be broken by hackers using a method (ddos), which is widely known and extensively used for over 20 years. And the product is closed source so no one can fix it. So... hackers break it on christmas. Oh no, it's not the companies fault! downvote! downvote! I'm tired of hacker news proprietary loving bullshit (except when the open source can somehow help them build proprietary products).

First off, that's not what he said. Secondly, lots of smart people have been talking about the need for basic income when robots take over large portions of the labor force. I'm personally unconvinced that it will create mass unemployment, but I don't call it crazy.

> Silly Valley

Fair enough. I suppose that term will stay in my head now.

I'm sceptical that the person hacking your console lived in the same apartment complex.

> wouldn't they also greatly reduce the inventor's chances of ever making any money with their patent?

Maybe, maybe not. If the inventor wants to make money by implementing their invention, and also benefit from the ideas other people have and implement which are similar, then this would help them. If they also happen to believe that exerting most software patents are akin to extortion, and they have no interest in it, then no also.

> And if you can't make any money with your patent, why make a patent? It's costly and complicated. Might as well just publicly disclose the invention (in a legally acceptable way), and the result will be the same as filing a patent under DPL.

It's generally less costly to patent something than defend a patent suit based on prior art. For example, see the podcast patent fiasco. Plenty of prior art, millions of dollars to defend.