Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 366 posts

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#261

Post by dboreham »

mjburgess wrote: post #157
woah wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that open source involves “handing over ip on a platter” is what’s stupid here. The vast majority of open source code is developed on the job. The fact that it’s open source means that the developer can take it with them when they leave and possibly even get some name recognition from it. If it was closed source, the developer would be handing it over on a platter to their employer, never to be seen again.

That's a very contemporary development. Open source was originally hobbyist, research or academic. Often, it was "programmer solve thyself". Businesses have only been employing significant numbers to work on open source projects for the last decade.

2 decades

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#263

Post by Razengan »

kbob wrote: post #223
toomanybeersies wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can believe that it is the best selling watch in the world. People don't buy many watches, because they last a long time. Last time I bought a watch was 7 years ago, and it still works fine. It's probably got another 3 years before I need to change the battery. I think the last time my old man bought a watch was some time in the 80's or 90's.

> People don't buy many watches, because they last a long time. Smartwatches can fix that problem. Obsolete in 1 year, battery failure in 2 years, incompatible with app ecosystem in 5 years.

My Series 2 Apple Watch still runs perfectly after 2 years of daily usage, and is compatible with all current apps as well as the upcoming watchOS 5.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#264

Post by dbingham »

pfortuny wrote: post #253
dbingham wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't trust self interest. Especially not in my butcher, brewer, or baker. Pure self interest gets you McDonalds, Bud Light, and Debi cakes. I consume exactly none of those things and have no desire to consume any of those things. They taste terrible, are bad for me, and the companies themselves are generally bad for their communities and the world. A good butcher, brewer, or baker is driven by craft first - care f…

You are conflating self-interest with greed. That is a great mistake in trying to understand Adam Smith. They are not the same thing. Values, ethics, morals... are part of self-inrerst for lots of people.

Sure, you could argue that, and maybe Adam Smith was at the time. It's been a long time since I've read him, I'd have to go back and re-read it to decide to what degree I think he's making that argument. But that is not how most people understand self interest in an economic context and that is not how Adam Smith is mostly wielded today (see the post I'm responding to for an example). Most people understand "self interest" to be "financial self interest" of the sort that supposedly is the primary driver of the modern economic idea of the "rational self interested person" who operates in markets.

Further, the vast majority of stock corporations have no values, ethics, or morals. They have only the maximization of stock holder value -- which is to say: greed. We know this from piles and piles of data on corporate behavior.

People and organizations of people are very different creatures and behave in very different ways.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#265

Post by matwood »

meddlepal wrote: post #36
Razengan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Watch is apparently the best selling watch (not just best selling smartwatch) in the world [0], with millions of users, and many copycats. Why shouldn’t it matter? Of course, there’s only so much you can do and make on such a small screen, and it is an accessory rather than a “primary” device, but that is another issue altogether, if one. I think it may even function as a motion control input for the rumored VR…

Best selling watch is believable, but who the heck buys and wears a watch for anything besides fashion these days? It's a totally niche market IMO.

I'm not a watch person, but bought a series 2 on sale last year. After a week I was cursing Apple because here is a device that I already feel lost without. Workout tracking is great, alerts are nice, quick views to upcoming meetings, and the list goes on. It ends up as a super useful device.

Also, niche? I literally see Apple Watches everywhere. At first I was surprised because all I read online was how the AW was a flop. I hope I can be part of a niche product as successful as the AW one day. /s

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#266

Post by kawsper »

pmontra wrote: post #156
caymanjim wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub is where developers go to find the software they use on a daily basis, and find the libraries they use to build even more software, which they usually put right back on GitHub. I use the public GitHub many times a month. More importantly, every single job I've had for nearly the past decade has stored its code in GitHub. Not publicly accessible, and rarely at a private github.com account; every place I work us…

I have some customers with repositories on Bitbucket. The reason is the pricing model for private projects. On Bitbucket you pay for developer and have infinite private projects. On GitHub is you pay for private projects and have infinite developers. If one company has many projects and few developers, Bitbucket is cheaper. I also have small customers who don't even know what a repository is. I self host with gitolit…

> On GitHub is you pay for private projects and have infinite developers.

That is the legacy pricing model. Their new pricing model matches Bitbucket: https://github.com/pricing

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#267

Post by matwood »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #56
Razengan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Watch is apparently the best selling watch (not just best selling smartwatch) in the world [0], with millions of users, and many copycats. Why shouldn’t it matter? Of course, there’s only so much you can do and make on such a small screen, and it is an accessory rather than a “primary” device, but that is another issue altogether, if one. I think it may even function as a motion control input for the rumored VR…

> Apple Watch is apparently the best selling watch (not just best selling smartwatch) in the world That's rather "big fish in a small pond" in 2018, though, isn't it? It's like making the best-selling model of recumbent bicycle in the world.

If we consider a small pond to be worth billions of dollars, sure.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#268

Post by gmueckl »

Dayshine wrote: post #226
wnsire wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That to me is what DotNet Core DotNet Core debugger is proprietary . You can only debug apps within Microsoft environment according to their license. Same thing for most of the azure tools , you are only allowed to use them within Visual Studio. I don't really called that "all in open source" . It's gimmick to give C# devs the illusion of a choice. Try to build , run & deploy a C# app on AWS with Atom. You're gonna…

>DotNet Core debugger is proprietary . You can only debug apps within Microsoft environment according to their license. People keep bringing this up as if it's some evil plan, not a legacy problem. The debugger is based on Visual Studio's closed source debugger. Visual Studio is a major paid product. It's not simple to just extract an integral feature from a paid product.

> It's not simple to just extract an integral feature from a paid product.

Why? This isn't a technical challenge. As far as I know, the actual debugging engines are pretty isolated modules with some alternative interfaces already available (e.g. cdb). So where do you see the real challenge?

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#269

Post by [deleted] »

jenscow wrote: post #201
kitsunesoba wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is absolutely the new IE... it’s just in the heyday stage instead of the “ancient barely supported monster” stage that IE was in when developers began to hate it. The need for greater variety in the spread of popular rendering engines is dire and real. Browser monoculture is dangerous and I refuse to use any browser that’s Chromium/Blink as my daily driver for this reason. I seek alternatives for sites that ob…

I disagree that Chrome it will become stagnated like IE. Microsoft had no desire to improve IE and make the web a more desirable platform than Windows. (I'd suggest it still doesn't) Google, however, directly benefit from the web being a better place, and they know first hand that a dominant browser can be toppled. And the competition is fierce, with MS back to bundling and it's so easy to switch browsers now that th…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#270

Post by ionised »

pfortuny wrote: post #253
dbingham wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't trust self interest. Especially not in my butcher, brewer, or baker. Pure self interest gets you McDonalds, Bud Light, and Debi cakes. I consume exactly none of those things and have no desire to consume any of those things. They taste terrible, are bad for me, and the companies themselves are generally bad for their communities and the world. A good butcher, brewer, or baker is driven by craft first - care f…

You are conflating self-interest with greed. That is a great mistake in trying to understand Adam Smith. They are not the same thing. Values, ethics, morals... are part of self-inrerst for lots of people.

Careful, Friedman and Hayek basically took Smith's theories warped it beyond recognition, and it is these two men that most of western economics has been tirelessly focused on this last few decades.

Believing that humans are merely information processors acting at all times only in their 'rational self-interest' is an incredibly narrow and simplistic view of humanity.

Post reply on HN