Free money? I honestly don't understand comments like this. It's as if you aren't even trying to make sense. Amazon would have been bailing out Roomba so if anything this would have cost Bezos money.
No, people actually disagree about cultural changes. Not sure what kind of world model you must have in order to believe that ANY society wouldn't suffer from "culture wars" as it evolves. I suppose you believe that the entire prohibition episode in US history was also orchestrated by "the rich"?
no, it's a python library, get a grip. Also "This lesson has been learned countless times"? No it hasn't, since when has a package manager developed by a for-profit company hurt the ecosystem?
honestly, that's how I read this article. Not sure why so many people seem to be agreeing with him... I guess it speaks to the general understanding about how to use python type hints
The USA is not particularly susceptible, you just are exposed to more stories about it happening in the US. It's happening all the time all over the world.
Not sure if this question is a troll but in the off chance it isn't here is a sample budget for the Australian government https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Depart.... It looks like the average revenue for a given year hovers a little under half a trillion dollars. So yeah they can afford it. The idea that "their coffers are empty and their balance sheet is negative" also indicates serious ignorance about how governments finance operations. I'd suggest you start with the country you currently live in and understand how your own government finances its operations. That will likely help you understand how Australia does it.
At some point the only lever left to pull is outright banning of foreigners.
That does not follow at all. If you look at the actual densities Barcelona is 1/3 as dense as the densest city in the world. There is plenty of room to accommodate more housing, they just need to build higher.
Your definition of monopoly contains a reference to "monopoly", so I am still not sure what your definition of monopoly is. It sounds like it is something like "big company that charges a price you think is high". Why do you think you know what the "right" price is. Isn't it a good thing the company delivering the most value is capturing the most profits? They will likely continue to deliver breakthroughs with the profits they are generating. Why would you want to kneecap a company generating so much value?
I hope ideas like "regulators break them up" never come true. I'll never understand why people crave the destruction of productive organizations. Android has been a stunning success. Valuable for consumers who enjoy the platform, profitable for the investors who bet on the platform and lucrative for the employees who work on the platform. The only people that seem to have a problem with Android are misguided ideologues who think that "big company == bad".
What kind of question is this? He is working on a JavaScript/TypeScript runtime not building a communication product. Why would you run to him to solve your pet grievance with Discord?
a commercially developed language in that its developers are clearly incentivized to add more features.
Do you have any evidence this is true? Most programming languages are developed either by a company (C#, Java, Swift, Go) or heavily influenced by many companies (Python, JavaScript, C++). Java had been criticized forever (until very recently) for it's slow pace of development and it was 100% controlled by either Sun or Oracle.
Comments like these show just how little developers investigate the reasons why features they personally dislike were introduced to a language.
What does the market cap of the company or the founders net worth have anything to do with the unit economics of operating a streaming business? Netflix, Hulu and others are all exploring charging more or introducing ads. Does that not factor into your analysis at all??
"You'd think we had enough of those already, but no.". The market determines when "we have had enough" not some arbitrary limit imposed by a current resident.
I agree it is strange take but unfortunately when you view everything through some sort of "big corp conspiracy" lense you end up with ideas like this. It's super common on hacker news. Tiresome but ever present.
The most logical explanation would be something like "they released this product because they were making a huge effort to get C# to be a truly cross platform language but the mac adoption remained low so they decided to retire this product and focus more on VS code which has massive adoption on mac"
But that would be too aligned with most developers priorities so it is not even on the radar for most people.