This is typical science/developer bullshit.You believe you are somehow smarter than everyone else. You're so certain your beloved scientific method is correct, that you are willing to say fuck you to any kid who is harmed by it because they are an anamoly. What's that? You couldn't possibly be wrong? The science is on your side? It's fucking ridiculous, arrogant, and self serving fucks like yourself who keep propogating this shit. It is 1000% ok to question science. And choose not to believe it. Go fuck yourself and your arrogant, disgusting attitude. Come back to me when your daughter develops autism or has some life altering disease because her parents trusted some stupid fucking spreadsheet you put together.

And ironically, this site reformatted my reply to make the URL's all lowercase. SMH.

Linus is wrong here. Sure, as developers, it would be really nice if bit-for-bit file naming was the gospel. But that is not the world we live in. https://f6ffb3fa-34ce-43c1-939d-77e64deb3c0c.atarimworker.io/ should be the same as https://f6ffb3fa-34ce-43c1-939d-77e64deb3c0c.atarimworker.io/ no matter what side of the fence you fall on this. File systems aren't any different.

I sympathize with your 40% hike. And I recognize there is no option to not participate. But I still contend, as a free person, that I never agreed to the deal. Other people forced me to comply. That is theft. No matter the "duty bound" premises you claim. I'll also recognize a gun in the wilderness isn't ideal. And that some laws need to be made to enforce valid ownership claims. But if you are forever taxed on something you are supposed to own, do you really own it?

You only say this because you have never known anything different. To you, and to a lot of people, you've accepted taxes as an axiom in life. The old adage of being the only two certain things in life, death and taxes. Laws can exist without taxes. Infrastructure can exist without taxes. It's baffling to me that people cannot possibly imagine a world where taking other people's money is the foundation of society.

I'm not debating that government plays a role in establishing a functioning society. The level of involvement is clearly debatable. I personally lean more libertarian. Teachers, police, roads, etc. Regulated private industry can handle these types of things better. But that's just my opinion.

What is not an opinion is that taxation, particularly income and property taxation, is theft. The government takes your money against your will (you wouldn't pay if you didn't have to). Even worse, they take your money for simply existing on your own land (property taxes). And if you refuse, they arrive with weapons ready to take you to jail. That is by all definitions, theft. Openly, unabashedly taking your money. To spend on other people.

Now, you can argue that is a necessary thing to provide the society that "a majority" of people want. And maybe some of it is. However, it is still theft if you are the person choosing to not participate in the game.

LOL. You picked a really bad example.

"In the United States, the majority of fire departments are volunteer-based. According to the National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC), out of the total 29,452 fire departments in the country:

18,873 are all-volunteer departments. 5,335 are mostly volunteer departments1. This means that a significant portion of U.S. cities and communities rely on volunteer firefighters for their emergency services."

Period.

There are more problems with the new app than a few "stubborn bugs". Half the time it doesn't even work. Sometimes it takes minutes and will randomly start to play whatever you put in the queue. The volume control is atrocious now. When you turn it off, there's noticeable delay between each speaker stopping. The whole thing is a complete pile of shit.

I used to rave about Sonos and their products. I loved them. And their support team was awesome. But this new app has completely ruined Sonos. I wouldn't recommend them to anyone.

I used to play Call of Duty a lot. To the point of being that guy who stands outside at Game Stop at midnight for the latest version. The alternating years between Treyarch and Infinity Ward seemed to be a good strategy and each dev group added their own little twist to the action. But at some point, I think it was around Advanced Warfare, it got a little silly with all the new gameplay gimmicks (cough...jetpacks). They tried taming it back down, but I lost interest. Paying $99 per year (+ add-ons) for the latest deluxe version that didn't seem all that different from the previous years. One year I think they even ditched the single player campaign all together.

I haven't played in a few years now. But having it on Game Pass might bring me back into the fold. Kudos to them for making a bold move like that. Hopefully they have come up with some new ideas for COD6.

LOL. I highlighted the error in your plan.

It's been a trick since the beginning of time. Long, lengthy contracts that average people have no possible way of understanding rule the world. If the average person breaks a rule, they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And they always lose because the rules in place are protected by the courts. However, if average joe plays by the rules, and succeeds, then the rules don't apply anymore. It's considered the fault of the person (i.e. Fraud) to follow the rules. I understand fairness, but it shouldn't be a double standard on how to enforce the rules.

As a developer? You don't have a choice. If you're in business and want to be successful, you have to play by Google and Apple rules or you lose. Period. There are no other choices.

There is no denying that MS used their competitive advantage for profit in the 90's. They coerced vendors, killed competitors, and overall did shitty things to keep their power. It's 100% what you would expect any company to do. Except, at a certain point, it becomes illegal. Apple is entering that sphere.

So where does this scope begin/end? Is a campaign message they want to send out to their base of supporters within the scope of their job? You could argue that it is since they would be talking about issues/topics related to their official job. If so, does it apply to their competitors also? Or do they get a strategic advantage of being able to block any opposing voice?