if 60% of surveyed folks say they are paid at market rate, and 6% above market, that's very different than 6% at, and 60% above. or even 33/33.
Talk about intentionally sloppy statistics. But that makes sense given that its source is a consultancy for _employers_ who will gladly slash salaries at any opportunity.
The alternative to "no up front costs, pay a percentage of revenue" is "pay [potentially a lot] up front, whether or not you make any revenue."
(At which point the poor widdle mom-and-pop developers like Epic with their mere $5 billion or so in annual revenue [1] will complain even more)
Talk about biting the hand that feeds them.
[1] _After_ platform commissions, mind you.
If you think the app maker will discount their prices by 30% because they're not forced to pay apple a cut, you're delusional.
The most likely outcome here will be that the price to the end-user will be exactly the same, only the app maker will make more profit.
(Note: I'm talking about stuff that's only accessed via apps, not subscriptions to services that can be used in a web browser on a PC or whatever. Incidently, for some time now, Apple takes a much smaller cut of recurring subscriptions)
I'm all for banning tracking... if it applies to *EVERYONE*.
But banning only Google from that... just ensures that someone else (and likely much worse!) will take Google's place.
Uh.,.. it's been the law that products show their country of origin for far longer than you or I have been alive. What exactly is an executive order supposed to accomplish beyond that?
Meanwhile, Amazon already shows the country of origin on every listing, under (oddly enough) "Country of Origin" under the "Product Information" section. (Of course, they are reliant upon their suppliers to provide this information.
They would have never sacrificed so much - or ANYTHING - for Kamala.
They couldn't even make the sacrifice of wearing a mask or not getting a haircut in the middle of a pandemic.
Haven't they been bleating from the rooftops that The Feds Have No Business Interfering With Educatuon, Which Is Best Left To The [Red] States That Clearly Know Best(tm).
Yet here we go with Federal mandates for state+local education curricula.
.
It has waned sharply since the introduction of GNOME 3 because of the direction it went in
No, it waned sharply because Ubuntu hard-forked GNOME2.99 to create their own in-house Unity desktop. Which they have since abandoned in favor of GNOME 3 + a couple of extensions.
Gnome was, and still is, overwhelmingly the "standard linux desktop" (I'd argue that based on sheer numbers, MacOS is the "standard UNIX desktop" as it is (or was) an actual UNIX..)
in the mobile space, which was its ultimate goal, it remains practically nonexistent
The GNOME folks have gone on the record numerous times stating that mobile (and touch) was *not* a consideration in the GNOME3 design. (To the contrary, it was, and still is, a very keyboard-centric design, which translates *horribly* to touch input)
Building web browsers (or even browser engines) has been a money-losing proposition for nearly thirty years. Once Microsoft started to bundle IE with Windows, that was effectively the end of independent browser makers being able to directly charge for the browser itself.
You can't "compete" with "free" unless you have a different way of making money on the back end. Google does. Apple does. Microsoft does. Mozilla does not.
(Microsoft is an interesting example; even with their near-total coroporate desktop monopoly, decided that mainiaining their own engine was too expensive. Now their browser is a Chrome reskin, except all datamining goes to MS instead of Google)
Mozilla is terrified firefox will have to compete in a marketplace
Uh, what marketplace is this exactly?
(hint: when the "price" of every option is capped at $0, you're the product, not the customer)
Mozilla's job was to provide a counter weight to proprietary or at least corporate-captive web browser offerings.
Once Google got in the browser business that should have been seen as fundamental conflict and they should have gone looking for other revenue streams. That is what they should have been doing on the self preservation front.
Um... you're complaining that Mozilla isn't attempting to diversify while simultaneously dumping upon their attempts to diversify.
Please, oh wise congressional panel, tell us which models on the market today _aren't_ at least partially made in China.
An "open hardware printer" is a complete nonstarter, because it's not economically viable.
This isn't software which has an incremental duplication cost of $0. Hardware costs money to build; as well as the per-unit costs you also have the investment in the tooling and production line (on top of the design/engineering work) that has to be amortized over your production run. Which means the smaller your production run, the more you have to charge to break even.
Oh, and you also need to secure a truly long-term supply of consumables, because what good is said printer when you can't get any more ink/toner for it?
Meanwhile, then there's the problem that you're not just competing against the likes of HP or Brother's current models (and believe you me they've optimized every penny they can out of the production costs) you're also competing against the significant secondhand market.
So. Designing the printer is going to take $$$, getting to the point of serial manufacture will take $$$$$$, and you can only get away with charging $ to the mas market (and effectively $0 for consumables because China Inc will be able to undercut you), and your target market will just shrug and buy a decade-old model secondhand. Actually make that sale prince also $0, because any "open" design will rapidly be mass produced for cheaper than you can by China Inc. Meaning all you can really guarantee that you'll never be able to recoup the engineering costs you put into it.
Welcome to capitalism.
Working 3000 hours a year over 48 weeks for a steel mill is normal under the union contracts. The dirt and grime is the enemy, the rest of the conditions are reasonable for heavy industry if you listen to the safety rules.
I call bullshit. 3000 hours over a year is just shy of 58 hours a week, every week (52, not 48!), for an entire year. An average of 8.24 hours a day, every day, for an entire year. As in, overtime every single day, zero time off for any reason whatsoever. And if you exclude weekends, that's 11.5 hours a day, five days a week, every week, for an entire year.
Shorten that to 48 weeks, you're looking at 9 hours a day, 7 days a week, or 12.5 hours a day if only working weekdays. For 48 weeks.
That is impossible to sustain safely even in the short term... To the point where I highly doubt it's even _legal_, even in our modern robber baron era, because those sorts of working conditions will lead to massive, direct liability when the inevitable accidents occur.
(FWIW stats I've seen is that full-time steel mill workers average about 45 hours/week)
At the height of the dot-com boom, engineers could do consulting for $200 per hour. Today, "full stack" engineers can expect to start out making $15/hour - adjusted for inflation, that's a third of what I made in my first entry level position.
...Fast food joints in semi-rural North Florida are currently advertising *starting* pay of $15/hour. That works out to about $30K/year if full time.
The less time planning, the more time programming.
