flumph

“I don’t think it’s nice to federate with a company that has been cited in multiple independent reports of massacres/genocides,”

And I don't think it's nice to take the choice away from users. I can block threads all on my own -- I don't need a nanny who doesn't even cite their sources.

The purpose is to learn how to publish code that cannot be used for forking as open source.

.

I have to obligate the folks to choose whether they want to pay me or help me code.

.

....it was not beneficial to me.

.

...new to gaining good visibility through open source,

Your entire comment reads as a refute of OPs criticism and an excuse for Meta's actions. If you were agreeing with OPs criticism, you would typically use phrases like "only five years".

And? Why take active steps to stop it from working instead of just stopping technical support? Oh yeah, to get more money.

Strong names are great, but (sometimes) mentioning the type of variable in the name is redundant.

"Monday".length is working JavaScript and does equal 6. No print command afaik though.

Yeah. The maintainer said in their blog post they're looking for a license that lets people read the code but not fork it. Isn't that just standard American copyright?

Edit: Looks like they went with CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Deed (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International). So not an open source license and one that CC themselves recommends not using for software.

This blog from the maintainer makes it clear they have no interest in open source other than to advertise their own skills

Preparing for a New Beginning for Floorp

Appreciate you giving credit where credit is due. It is 100% corporate greed.

Kotaku’s editor-in-chief has resigned

I'm more concerned that the company decided it was OK to meld the "From:" line of her email (asking for support) into her profile. If they think that's an appropriate way to handle PII, I don't trust them.

I hate patent trolls, but I will say "it couldn't have happened to a nicer company". I hope they both go broke on legal fees.

I generally have to disagree on it being disrespectful. There's an inherent cost in any business relationship that has to be accounted for with low volume partners. Every company that offers volume discounting does it for this exact reason -- the price per piece doesn't change, but the other costs can be spread over more pieces.

Could Valve eat some of this cost to promote indie development? Absolutely. But it's not disrespectful to price your product with volume discounts.