Instead look at their profile...

Points != creds. Creds == creds.

Don't be fucking lazy and rely on points, especially when they link their identity.

I'll put it this way, I don't give a shit about Robert Downy Jr's opinion on AI technology. His notoriety "means nothing to anybody". But instead, I sure do care about Hinton's (even if I disagree with him).

malfist asked why they should care. You said points. You should have said "tptacek is known to do security work, see his profile". Done. Much more direct. Answers the actual question. Instead you pointed to points, which only makes him "not a stranger" at best but still doesn't answer the question. Intended or not "you should believe tptacek because he has a lot of points" is a reasonable interpretation of what you said.

  > but I understand that the first principal component of casual skepticism on HN is "must be a conflict of interest".

(But if you think Tom is random, look at his profile. First link, not second)

  The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that.

  - Feynman

Radiative power is really efficient for hot things but not so great when you're trying to keep things down to normal levels. Efficient for shedding heat from a sun but not so much for keeping a cpu from overheating...

Note that they have multiple licenses. This isn't entirely uncommon. The difference licenses apply to different things.

  You may be licensed to use source code to create compiled versions not produced by Mattermost, Inc. in one of two ways:

  1. Under the Free Software Foundation’s GNU AGPL v3.0, subject to the exceptions outlined in this policy; or
  2. Under a commercial license available from Mattermost, Inc. by contacting commercial@mattermost.com

This really seems like a dual license situation where they are saying "Let's encourage Open Source, but if you want to just use our work to make yourself rich and not even acknowledge you're using us then fuck you, pay us."

I expect this to become more common as companies routinely infringe on OSS licenses while simultaneously many companies are hesitant to use OSS because of licenses. This at least gives an out for the good actors and allow devs to make money (other than being reliant on donations, because... that's worked out...).

But maybe I'm misunderstanding? If so, I don't know what I'm missing

You're apparently missing the two points I made in the post you are replying to, or at the very least you're not responding to them. By which I don't mean to say they are necessarily valid points.

  You are licensed to use the source code in Admin Tools and Configuration Files (server/templates/, server/i18n/, server/public/, webapp/ and all subdirectories thereof) under the Apache License v2.0.

  Apache (OSS):
    |- server/
    | |- i18n/
    | |- public/
    | |- templates/
    |- webapp/

  Not Apache (pay us/not OSS):
    |- api/
    |- e2e-tests/
    |- server/
    | |- bin/
    | |- build/
    | |- cmd/
    | |- enterprise/
    | |- scripts/
    | |- Makefile
    | |- path.go
    | |- this is not a complete list but you get the point
    |- tools/

Again, I am open to misunderstanding but that's my read.

Also note that they have an enterprise license (/server/enterprise/License): https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost/blob/master/server/...

The README on the enterprise directory also links to a page with more detail (FAQ): https://docs.mattermost.com/product-overview/frequently-aske...

A pretty obvious one is that there's magnitudes more players these days and many more options for how they can play. Hell, there's even a few more billion people on the planet so it's more than just percentage of people owning systems that can play games. I'll let you think about others because I want to focus on what the patent said, but if top selling games weren't making at least an order of magnitude more money then that'd be a very concerning sign.

The parent said hardware was a big unlock and this is undoubtedly true. I don't just mean that with better hardware we can do more and I don't think the parent did either. Hardware is an unlock because it enables you to be incredibly lazy. If your players have powerful hardware you can get away with thinking less about optimization. You can get away with thinking less about memory management. You can get away with thinking less about file sizes.

The hardware inherently makes game development easier. We all know the quake fast inverse square root for a reason. Game development used to be famous for optimization for a reason. It was absolutely necessary. Many old games are famous for pushing the limits of the hardware. Where hardware was the major bottleneck.

But then look at things like you mentioned. Undertail is also famous for its poor code quality. All the dialogue in a single file using a bunch of switch statements? It's absurd!

But this is both a great thing and a terrible thing. It's great because it unlocks the door for so many to share their stories and games. But it's terrible because it wastes money, money that the consumer pays. It encourages a "good enough" attitude, where the bar keeps decreasing and faster than hardware can keep up. It is lazy and hurts consumers. It makes a naïve assumption that there's only one program running on a system at a time.

It's an attitude not limited to the game industry. We ship minimal viable products. The minimum moves, and not always up. It goes down when hardware can pick up the slack or when consumers just don't know any better.

Things like electron are great, since they can enable developers to get going faster. But at the same time it creates massive technical debt. The fact that billion dollar companies use a resource hog like that is not something to be proud of, it should be mocked and shamed. Needing a fucking browser to chat or listen to music?! It's nothing short of absurd! Consumers don't know any better but why devs celebrate this is beyond me.

People should move fast and break things. It's a good way to innovate and figure out how things work. But it has a cost. It leaves a bunch of broken stuff in its wake. Someone has to deal with that trash. I don't care much about the startup breaking some things but I sure do care when it's the most profitable businesses on the planet. They can pay for their messes. They create bigger messes. FFS, how does a company like Microsoft solve slow file browsers by just starting it early and running in the background?! These companies do half a dozen rounds of interviews and claim they have the best programmers? I call bullshit.

  > But VSCode integrates it directly in the app and it's a much better experience.