HN user
I wouldn't recommend going toe to toe with a technology company when there is nothing worthwhile to gain (If there is something worthwhile, then see a lawyer). Morally I think the project should be able to stay up. However, I would avoid the legal system at all costs. The stress isn't worth it.
There's a spider in front of this one. http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/webcam.php?id=22466
Because Stone Cold said so.
I don't know exactly why, but my guess is because it is an objectively small/unimportant news story that has been analyzed for multiple days, as you mention.
1. To me, abstractly, a software engineer is someone who can going into a new language/situation and the result would be the best possible outcome given the supplied circumstances.
2. I think it would be fair to call yourself a software engineer once you have verified your ability to master multiple languages, and finished multiple projects, as the concepts behind them are the same.
There is no rule that dictates when someone becomes a software engineer. It happens when you're confident enough that you know your stuff, which is subjective. To me, it's when you can learn any language/project, given a reasonable (subjective to other SEs) amount of time.
Why is this chlidish article upvoted? This sounds like moaning from a 7th grade kid who just learned Javascript.
Really?
"Despite speculation on the Internet that Summly only licensed its summarizing technology from SRI International, an independent research institute, Mr. D’Aloisio said the technology was developed by Summly and that the company owned 100% of the intellectual property behind the service."
http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2013/03/26/what-does-30-mil...
To the author: Would you have not taken a buyout offer from Yahoo! if you were in this kids position? All HN discussions regarding this topic have just screamed jealousy/disdain. It is as if people come to HN to read an intelligent argument to argue for their immature feelings. Also, the most important premise in your argument, that their technology was licensed, is incorrect. Their natural language technology was 100% proprietary according to them, and not "licensed from SRI" [0].
[0] http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2013/03/26/what-does-30-mil...