241–250 of 363 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And apparently at least 5 of them visit HN
Given how many of the personal attacks on Steve are saying almost the same thing, I don't know that it's "at least five". It might be just one person with multiple accounts. If it's more than one, they're all following the same idea of what message they should be using to smear Steve...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t actually see how Amazon stewardship is a bad thing. Corporate custody has been the case for several useful programming languages, with Java, .NET, and Go being obvious and popular examples. Replacing a core team of advocacy-oriented developers with production-oriented developers might give the project a positive new direction too. After all, a popular, design-by-committee compiled language with RAII memory ma…
Just based on the technology side: When using their systems a big thing, seems to be repackage and rebuild existing systems and create a load of new jargon. The systems seem to be islands, the effect is that at every place they are separated, billing can be introduced. Everywhere, where new names and jargon are introduced lock-in is introduced. I cannot see it being good for the medium or long term health.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He called out specific things and had a tweet which was pretty vague about some bad behavior. If you want to focus on that and imply it's childish you are the one distracting from discussing more important issues. That's probably why takes like that get downvoted. --- From the comments Steve has made it sounds like Amazon effectively has control of Rust not only because of their large involvement but also because a s…
He said in his first tweet that he wants to have a "serious conversation", then goes on to list three grievances: that Amazon has a lot of involvement in Rust leadership, that Amazon "marginalized the core team" (but no details) and that Amazon "has done some other dirty shit" (but no details). That's two out of three grievances that have no substance whatsoever. You cannot have a serious conversation about these thi…
> that Amazon "marginalized the core team" (but no details)
That seems like details to me. It's also extrapolated on elsewhere here.
> That's two out of three grievances that have no substance whatsoever. You cannot have a serious conversation about these things if there is not more detail.
Actually, you could, just by ignoring the things you don't see evidence of and focusing on the points that do, and assessing them based on merit.
The messenger is irrelevant if the message is verifiable and is worth discussing. It's useful to call out points that seem to not be backed up, or be purposefully vague. It's not fine to use that as a reason to ignore other points because "you cannot have a serious conversation" when that's obviously not the case when it's not tried.
What is the issue? Companies & languages, the only issue I am aware of is Oracle suing Google over the use of Java. Are they concern that Amazon will sue the users of Rust language?
It is always hard to imagine how this or that corporation might be at odds with what benefits a language user community. But it is not at all hard for any particular corporation to discover such differences, or to act on those discoveries where they can.
Why was it a problem that Mozilla was heavily involved in Rust? As an outsider, I felt that Mozilla lend credibility to Rusts efforts, and Rust gave Mozilla relevance.
Having a single company mostly control an Open Source project means that if the company decides to drop the project, stop funding it, and/or move devs from working on it to work on something else, progress halts and it's difficult to get things back. That's why so many projects try to have Foundation that controls resources and can be financially backed, etc. There's also the "if the company goes evil the project may…
RIP.
I have questions: 1. Can you really blame it on Amazon? 2. Shouldn't you actually blaming that on other companies too, like the rest of the FAANGs for starters, for not hiring rust contributors? 3. Aren't the people involved with Rust at Amazon at fault for putting up with the supposedly dirty stuff without saying a word? The paycheck is too fat to do the right thing? I'm honestly quite fed up with the hypocritical B…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's possible to build a production grade programming language today without large amounts of capital. Unfortunately, companies are the only way to gain access to that amount of money. I elaborated a bit on that over here: https://twitter.com/steveklabnik/status/1397930913854590976
Challenge accepted >:-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's all? What should we be outraged about specifically?
If you can't figure out what to be outraged about, maybe don't be outraged?
Is there more context here that's missing from the tweet thread? > And now they want to actually take Amazon's principles and claim that they're Rust's. These just... literally... aren't Amazon's principles. At all. "The practice of coming up with pithy statements to guide decision-making" is the Amazon part. > they've also taken steps to marginalize the core team. and some other dirty shit I won't say rn. This sound…
The announcement blog post at https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps//blog/2021/09/08/ru... says the initial version was "quite closely modeled on AWS tenets".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5raEKA57PMY
(Disclosure, I'm an Amazon employee and am familiar with how Amazon uses Tenets for teams)
The thread starts with a (vague) statement against Amazon trying to expand its control on the Rust project.
It later ends up being a spat between rust team members (who aren't a part of Amazon) on the role of the Core team.
I feel Steve does not have enough support among the members of the rust teams for whatever he was going for with this. The derailing of the discussion also makes it seem as if there are other issues at play.
Sadly, this may end up amounting to nothing more than burnt bridges.