The example already given makes the point. Work has been great on the M1 but my understanding is that this has not translated all that well to e.g. M2, M3 and M4.

Or how much is really just the simple rational economic idea that piracy is better value for money.

And I still can’t help but think that if there really was a large market of people willing to pay a premium for a more permissive access model then we might already see trends in this direction. My hunch is the most folk don’t really care and price remains the dominant factor.

The essential point of the article was that it’s higher prices that’s pushing people towards piracy (either through price rises or fragmented subscriptions). It wasn’t that it is the restrictive streaming model that is pushing people towards piracy.

I’m fact it was precisely this restrictive streaming model that was the one to finally beat piracy. At low prices, that’s already been proven and it’s higher prices that is brining piracy back.

I think the inconvenient truth here is that when anyone has got close to doing such a thing the price has been high enough that it turns out nobody actually turns up to pay for it, not at least outside a small niche.

@woodruffw I love your quote above that commits you to your open source base and I'm rooting for you. But how about an approach that commits you to this sentence in a more rigorous and legal way, and spin off your open source tooling to a separate community-based entity? Of course, upon that you can continue to maintain sufficient representation to make Astral's commercial products the natural progression and otherwise the model remains the same. That would be a significant transfer of control, but it is that very transfer that would get a overwhelming response from the community and could really unblock these great tools for massive growth.

I work a lot with LLVM/Clang and whilst i know Apple and Google are significant contributors I feel confident that LLVM itself exists outside of that yet accept that e.g. Apple's contributions afford them weight to steer the project in ways that match their interests in e.g. Swift and Apple tooling.

Occasionally I will boot into a Windows partition because I have to do something windows-only. I’m so out of the Windows world these days that I mentally have to prepare myself not to get too fired up with it all, just calm down do the thing and get out. :)

Agree that it’s a lot of effort to switch though, so good for you on making the switch!

For those writing in compiled languages like C/C++ and particularly with an interest in performance it's been very helpful just to be able to read compiler output and see what it's generating. Takes the guesswork out of it, removing the uncertainty by simply being able to see what the compiler is actually doing. You can just write code and see the result, who knew!. It's actually helped my understanding of C++ in seeing the bigger picture.

Of course it's also much easier to learn just to read a little disassembly than actually write the stuff. I'm sure I'm not alone in that for me Compiler Explorer (https://godbolt.org) was my gateway into this. You can get quite far even if just knowing the basics (I'm no expert).

A politician isn’t even a practicing politician without votes. Democracy is ultimately driven by citizens. Of course politicians will do their best to influence public opinion (it’s their job) but are ultimately in service to it though elections.

It’s why what people think (and vote) matters in a democracy.

And back to the point, why voting with your feet (switching to Firefox) actually means something.

Of course that won’t happen now since Israel got to him first.

“All 125 ICC member states, including France and the United Kingdom, are required to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they enter the state's territory”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court_a...

Almost everything you said is technically true, but with a degree of selective reasoning that is remarkably disingenuous. Conversely, the top comment is far less accurate but captures a feeling that resonates much more widely. Netanyahu is one of the most disliked politicians in the world, and for some very good and obvious reasons (as well as some unfortunately much less so, which in fact he consistently exploits to muddy the water to his advantage)

From a broad reading on the subject it’s obvious to me why this is the top comment.

Of course the tradeoff is that you have to resolve the dependency graph yourself. That’s more work on you when you just want a set of pre-serialised, sequential steps to follow.

My argument is precisely that the mechanisation of information is fundamentally different from the scale at which a human can learn. One immediate consequence being there is no longer a natural brake on the scale of what can be sourced for use in a derivative work.

To be clear this is not a value judgement, just to point out that it _is_ different, just as driving is fundamentally different from what one can do with one’s own feet. Of course the mechanisation of transport is history and seems daft to argue against. But it is different. Whether that’s good or bad is a much harder question.

Computers have no such limitation and can consume almost the entirety of a subject’s work in a few weeks or months. I think that alone is enough to say that yes, it is fundamentally different.