Terminal Phase 1.0
(Ooohhh, a game in Racket!)
"healthy, ad-supported web" — how to tell the article was written by Google.
No, Google, ad-supported web is not "healthy", and there is no such thing as "good ads". You're privatizing the web and are trying to normalize this disgusting effort with these dead-pan statements. As if nobody remembers what the web was before you decided to make a market out of it.
Philip Morris is moving from cigarettes to vapes to “fundamentally enhance” your health.
I know this is a long-shot, but is there a [Patreon-alike] way to support Mozilla? I'm definitely in the "please don't kill yourselves trying to be something you're not" camp.
[Patreon-alike: Noun. A service where I can give money in some fashion so they can use it. Note that Patreon here is used in the generic sense. Suggesting your favorite service in my replies is not welcome, and I'm requesting that move along]
Another thing that just could be the problem is the rise of forges, like Github and Gitlab. I'm not saying they are bad, but they lowered the bar for contributing and, thus, contributing to an open source project became easier.
So now people want to show the world they are open source contributors, but don't want the burden of carrying their own version of it.
When forges didn't exist, you _had_ to maintain your own version, no matter what.
A big example of those problems is Android: Goog has so much control over it that there are thousands of patches floating around to fix some corner case/improve something that will never get approved and the only solution is a fork.
But Goog puts so much force around spreading their version of Android that a fork would never succeed -- specially due "tivoization", which, again, Goog has no intent to fix 'cause their community is not the Android users, its the other Android OEMs.
Sometimes, the problem is that the target for a project is not the users, but something else. For example, Actix dev pointed that the company he works for was using it, so maybe he saw the company as the real user, not the community.
(Disclaimer: Just to push an example here, not saying the Actix dev actually did this.)
Long time ago, when things didn't work, it was fine to fork and do your own version: When GCC didn't want RedHat patches, RedHat released eGCC; when Compiz didn't want more patches, Emerald appeared.
That is fine and should be the way to go when the "authoritative" source of a project fails the views of the community.
But recently, when the authoritative source fails, people jump into it instead of going another route.
Pessoas > Tecnologia
People > Technology
functional.cafe is an instance for people interested in functional programming and languages.