Raising questions? No. The only question is how far, how much, how many people will die.

You didn’t tell us when he asks if everything is OK. That is a large omission, and I hope you can update the original post with examples of what led up to the question being asked. Also, what is the setup there? Are you working at Subway making sandwiches? Do you have adjacent desks? Do you show up to work with black eyes? We are left wondering what’s up.

Certainly anyone who repeatedly asks “Are you OK?” is exacerbating some issue, but I would be hesitant to offer any advice about what you ought to do without reading more details.

(In other words, the missing missing reasons applies here just as it did in the original scenario, for those who remember it.)

But that’s not what happened. If the lawyers are saying that some open source groups can’t work with open source groups in Russia, as Linus indicated, that doesn’t mean either group dislikes the other group. I don’t think this is a question of animosity.

It’s banning contributors but not contributions themselves. So there must be inconvenience but somewhat effective workarounds. That could be fun to see unfold.

Everyone else is wrong but you’re right? … It’s a cute idea.

Exactly. People do learn. That’s who we’re trying to reach.

What, so waiting until December would create more pressure? I can’t see how.

Sure sure, and the amount matters, right?

It has to be there, because politics is connected with lawmaking, and open source software is dependent on laws.

A lot of people like to say that politics isn’t in their life or that they keep politics out of their life, but the reality is that’s just not true. The rules that govern society affect you, always, either with or without your input, either with or without your acknowledgment.

You’re probably trying to say that we should keep pointless politicking out of open source software, and I agree, but that’s going to come down to personal definitions of pointlessness.

I generally agree, and I also think that the spy agencies would assassinate him within a couple of days. There’s a bunch of men who have been running those groups for decades, and they don’t want to give up their power because some lunatic is making a power grab on the White House.

It’s interesting that you think the national guard would support him. I don’t think it’s as simple as that. We can be sure that most lifers in the military have considered what they would do if the unelected commander-in-chief gave an obviously unconstitutional order. It’s not just a hypothetical to them.

That’s generally false. But even if it’s true, all the boss has to do is argue that medium-term profits will be generated by whatever policy they want to adopt. Since nobody knows the future, they might be right, and they’re legally rock solid.

In other words, the duty to increase value produces unfalsifiable policy claims. So it is meaningless.

The Pirate Bay will always be with us.

There you go, good job. In the future, do that the first time.

I have heard that some of the newer sites have much better search engines and UIs, or maybe you can even get search built into your software. So perhaps it’s more of a fallback site these years.

Nintendo has been a dominant company in the video game industry for decades. It should come as no surprise that they’ve made some amazing games.

I like how you say that without citing any sources. You can be right, but there’s no reason you’re speculation is any better than someone else’s.

If you subscribe to the Pirate Bay, there is no expiration date.

The article did mention a fundamental obstacle. It said quite clearly that we would run out of resources before we had enough computing power. I suppose you could counter that by arguing that we could discover magic, or magical technology, or a lot of new resources through space exploration.

Of course things get more efficient. But in the past few decades they’ve gotten efficient in predictable, and mostly predicted, ways. It’s certainly possible that totally unexpected things can happen. I could win the lottery next week. Is that the standard? Are you pushing the stance that says AGI is somewhat less likely than winning the lottery or getting struck by lightning, but by golly it’s more than zero, how dare you suggest that it’s anywhere close to zero?

I think the details matter a lot. If I’m an active contributor to a site and I get a bait and switch, then I’m probably going to leave the site permanently. I try to keep track of what’s happening to make that less likely.

If you’re setting up a service and you realize it doesn’t scale up well, I think you should try to state your roadmap on your site somewhere, so the users can expect changes that might happen. If people go in expecting that you might need to monetize in certain ways, they won’t be disappointed when you do. Or rather, they might be slightly disappointed but they’ll understand.