Is it common practice now to take open source techniques and ship them as proprietary software? I'm seeing a lot of Photoshop tools which I just saw in Two Minute Papers a couple months ago...
Exactly. It is more lucrative to provide a product for free and make money mining data rather than providing a paid product, and this is even making it harder for competitors to enter the market and not die instantly. The next logical step is not paid products, but rather open source ones with distribued data storage.
Hypnotism is banned in UK television. Advertisment is not that far off from hypnotism, and needs to face similar consequences. Promote your product all you want, but don't exploit human pyscology to manipulate people into doing what you want.
Linode, DigitalOcean, or a $200 used server from EBay. Both Linode and DO also have really good Kubernetes services. AWS and alike force users to stick to their ecosystem of products, and come with all sorts of weird pricing models. And if you really need some sort of serverless features or BaaS, you can just self-host that on a VPS.
I see where the SDL author is coming from, but is it really that hard to get local GitLab instance running? Or even just using GitLab? I saw other replies about how GitHub has a network of open source developers, but that didn't bother the SDL author before, and I don't see why it is bothering him now.
I used to think Google was the "good guy" by providing so many resources for free, but I've realized how they've exploited their market dominance by essentially manipulating the masses with their ad service. We need to move away from conglomerates and start using software that doesn't sell your soul to the devil.
Code doesn't make sense, weird ass abstraction, but works beautifully. I never could understand where the dependency injection parameters came from lmao