I am influenced by both and control none, bobbing along the waves of misinformation and mismanagement like a cork in the ocean .

few people know that or will understand it; it’s been tarnished by the foundation.

If I were managing thunderbird, I would do a rebrand because I am not the first or last person to make that mistake ; there are tens of millions of me

Just for argument’s sake, it’s easier to change the behavior of one mismanaged foundation than the broken news cycles

Few know how things are structured. Or more importantly, how it could be restructured later.

I’m cynical and already looking at forks

This all assumes all years are measured by the same orbit with no mixing and matching planets or space habitats.

The standard earth year had not been adopted system wide

Some socks have horrible return times

The mit license allows a mix of public and commercial code run by the same company, with minimal legal issues. One can use other tactics I am sure, but this one seems good when the commercial code absolutely needs the public code .

I think some confusion here can be resolved by stating this is anti foss, taking advantage of foss, it is capitalism taking advantage of having a good code base while making sure any contribution from outside the company is minimized. At the same time it gives my company absolute control over the private part.

Usually get into arguments here! I’m not defending it, but am saying open source would be less without.

For our use case, this makes the most sense.

I’m not at all sure about the larger trend you noticed, but I know a non trivial number are doing it for the same reasons

Speaking for myself, it’s because future monetization can be easier under mit when using a foss utility and private code.

My project would not exist at all unless there were ways to make money off it.

True, others can also use that same code too, in the exact same way, but that requires quite the investment, and those of us that are doing this are banking on not getting the interest of a monopoly in that way. We are competing against other small businesses who have limited resources.

At the same time the free part can get a boost by the community.

I comment a lot in politics here, and am sometimes an ass, so cannot name this project

He is not wrong. Unless people start to take steps , the dependency of tech will be used to chain most of us. Granted, these chains will be the kindest and gentlest chains seen in a long time.

Social revolution lives on in decentralized services, like this; the true battles will be later though. This year is a mild warm up. I can’t imagine the challenges that await many

I know well enough to quit here lol.

I’m more tickled than mad at your stuff, but even I know when I’m in a losing situation

Or maybe you are making some assumptions and really like rust; while lacking experience in memory management.

I’m not saying anything about my code; but there are literally dozens of strategies you probably don’t know about that are used in a dozens of ways, if not hundreds, by millions of coders.

I like rust well enough, but it manages memory based on opinions by some people. These opinions have trade offs. You are not familiar with that, and are attacking me.

This reinforces my own opinions of people who push rust.

I think it will grow! One day it will compete that way

I am happy that you like rust.

I also would like to point out there are many ways to manage memory. Not all of them are badly designed and hacked code done by stubborn people who just need to be saved

I made no such claim about c nor am I saying it should be used in general, if you read what I wrote more carefully, I am actually against all that

Ignoring your rudeness now. It’s more like I’ve seen the same wheel invented a lot of times and can recognize most tech are basically equally functional.

I used to make fun of cobol because it has no stack; I often wondered why such a language was ever popular, why it had so many lines of code. Now, I know there was a reason it worked, why it still is used, and can appreciate how people work with it.

I’ve made a couple of my own languages nobody uses; so new and different languages do not overawe me as much.

Any popular language, new or old, works well enough with it having strengths and weaknesses. Some have superiority in their libraries or ecosystems and not the core. It’s ok to choose a language based on this or that. It’s ok to mix and match languages together in one project because it’s how they talk together which makes it work, and in the larger scope of things it really does not matter which is used.

I personally have nothing against any language, including rust.

It’s a general trend to try to fit a specific language everywhere that irritates me, I tend to see that as a software nerd’s religion or politics instead of how much better that language is.

And so, based on the above, is why proponents of their holy language irritate the crap out of me. And rust is certainly not the first to do that

Sounds more like a self replicating malware somewhere, probably in some totally unrelated Wordpress plugin on unrelated sites scattered about

Some old fashioned c++ and c developers, like me, feel more entitled to entrench more, and see Rust as a political movement, and not a serious tool.

I’m fairly reactionary against adding more Rust to stable projects. While I’m sure at some of that is me being old and set in my ways, the other gives people like me talking points, which may or may not help.

I have the opinion the best quality chair one can find is as important as the best computer one can use