16% so far!

Remember, if it wasn’t for Larry Ellison, LibreOffice wouldn’t exist. I remember reading about those shenanigans while they were happening and desperately hoping a fork would appear soon. I wasn’t disappointed.

I’ll give you an upvote just for knowing what type of gem it was. So many South African diamond mine comments smh.

o7

If you want to talk about taxes, include cost of your healthcare. Because that’s included in our taxes.

Fun fact, America pays as much per capita for healthcare through taxes as Canadians, but that only gets you Medicare and Medicaid. Americans sure get angry about a lot of things, but I never see them get angry about that.

Now do the exchange rate.

Seems like a pretty sane way to handle market pressures, rather than, “I hope nothing terrible happens and my bill is suddenly thousands of dollars.”

Just watch for graphics tearing. On a completely unrelated note, why are earthquake zones so heavily populated?

The other response said it well enough, but I’ll go a step further.

MS made a tradition of moving functionality around in their OS for no other reason that I could glean than grouping things in an at least superficially comparable group and absolutely not where it was in the last version, merely so that certification from the previous version wouldn’t apply to the current one. They would do similar things with their Office application menus, in one version moving them around based on how often you used them (try doing phone support with that!), in another replacing them with little pictures that pretended they were related to their functionality, and again moving them around every version apparently for the sake of requiring recertification.

To top it all off, they would also not give you access to the old menuing systems. You could argue bloat, but that would be ignoring the massive piles of it they added for the sake of animating their new menus alone (which has value, to a degree).

I’m aware of some of the interesting bits of woodworking, as well. I can imagine the response if you told woodworkers that the only hammer/mallet they could use was a 16 oz claw hammer. And the reason we made all those different hammers is because they are the best option for the task they were designed for. You can get away with using a smaller set, especially if your workflow would require using some rarely enough that it isn’t worth adding in their storage and cost to be worth it, but a good woodworker will still be aware of those tools and be assessing their processes to determine if it’s time to expand their toolset.

And the difference between the physical world and the world of computer interfaces is you aren’t limited to just one. The open source world is particularly fond of including deprecated functionality because there are a lot of pieces working together and it will often take years to get everything updated, and you will never know when the last dependency is removed. Likewise with UIs. A lot of the time, a deprecated one can be kept around for those who can’t be bothered to learn the new one, but the cost of keeping the old version around for a few years is usually relatively low (and the developer can determine how much they are willing to have that cost be and do things to help make it stay within that limit). That’s no reason to leave the old version as the default, though.

You seem very defensive of the workers. That’s cool, I’m one of them.

Good workers will do better with the right tool. Bad workers, those who are resistant to change and are unwilling to learn, will never do better. So why cater to the bad workers? Now catering to the bad workers makes sense if the job is so basic that virtually no training is required, and bad workers need to eat, too. But saying we should all crawl because they don’t want to run is absurd.

Just because someone got used to walking around on their knuckles doesn’t mean walking upright isn’t easier and better overall. Sure, it will be difficult, it will be uncomfortable, and they’ll have to get used to it before they see any improvement, but once they get past those hurdles even they will be amazed at how fast walking upright can be. And in the meantime, no one else who already has a tendency to walk upright will have to go through the pain and inefficiency of walking on their knuckles.

I do hope you taught him the many better ways of doing this. I absolutely agree with making an environment where mistakes are easily owned up to (I made a mistake that ended up costing my employer over $10k in the last year), but if it isn’t coupled with turning those into learning experiences (here’s why you don’t do that, here’s why this is a better solution) then you just have a lot of mistakes happening over and over again.

I wasn’t making any judgement on this, although if I were, I would point out that one of the benefits of open source is the ability to fork projects and move away from the elements you have a philosophical issue with, such as what the OpenOffice developers did when Oracle purchased Sun and started imposing their unplayable rules. What I was half-jokingly pointing out was some guy coming in deep into the conversation of highly opinionated people and acting like the conversation wasn’t about their various opinions.

As someone who hasn’t bothered to read any of the detail about this whole mess until just now, the comments from three years ago were all relatively civil, even if the response by the developer was dismissive. That this was corrected within 6 weeks and people are still talking about it is pretty impressive, though. Looks like people are trying to make enemies, not converts.

Do you know what topic brought you here?

“Hey guys, let’s not use this free software, because of their views.”

“Maybe we shouldn’t use this other free software because of their views.”

“Why are you guys worried about which free software you use based on their views?”

“We can all tell you aren’t new, why are you complaining about our unofficial pastime?”

A cogent argument. I’m convinced!

You specifically said you chose the MIT license because you wanted to use it in commercial projects. That’s business, no matter how small. As the owner of the property, you could have used any and all licenses available to you. Also, if you wanted to require users of your code to attribute or notify you, you could have. If you want to be disappointed in their behavior that’s perfectly fine, too. Corporations usually disappoint if you have any altruistic expectations of them.

Here’s the core issue. The developer didn’t know his rights, and made a mistake. I’m not criticizing, people make a career dealing with crap like this. But if you want to make a business out of something, it’s worth it to do some research or talk to a lawyer. I believe the MIT license has its place but, from what the OP said, this isn’t it.

There is nothing stopping a GPL project using MIT-licensed code except for lack of desire to do the work. They are one-way compatible.

It really depends. If the contract gives ownership of the work created to the purchaser, he has no rights to it whatsoever. Moreover, trying to do a clean room implementation of your own code is almost impossible without help. A permissive license would give the purchaser unlimited use of the product, including resale while still allowing the producer unlimited use, as well. If the contract is written correctly, the producer might even retain ownership, with the right to use different licenses, while the purchaser would have few or no restrictions.