I know that my drone's software doesn't allow it to fly above 500 feet. I can't imagine this drone being an ignorant or careless recreational operator. Aren't these things heavily regulated now?
I'm the same, although I understand OP's sentiment to a degree. I also like no interaction with someone who is potentially or visibly sick and contagious. That is why I never stand in the service line at the grocery store. It's always self serve only.
Planes aren't built to withstand head on collisions because in almost every case the passengers would all die anyway and to keep the weight of the plane down for fuel efficiency. Firetrucks on the other hand are super heavy due to all the water they carry.
It is my understanding the buck stops with the Firetruck driver. No matter what clearance they had, they were supposed to visually check the runway was clear before crossing. The truck didn't slow down at all.
Learning about the Fourier Transform in my Signals and Systems class was mind opening. The idea you can represent any cycling function with sinusoidal functions would not only never occur to me but I would have said it wasn't possible.
This quote in a comment after the article from a pseudo stake holder or relevant consultant was disturbing..
> I believe it is unfair to benefit - especially financially - from a community effort, then turn your back on said community. It is your right, you are correct in saying so, but it is also a bridge that you are burning and you must be aware of that.
Correct is correct. It isn't their fault the rules didn't explicitly state rights in perpetuity. Retaliation based on vibe logic is not only childish but also in this case, illegal.
This person suggested the request for prize money returned and and awards rescinded. And from the tone and logic, no doubt they are doing more behind the scenes.
For the sake of public record, I would like to state that I was doing nothing "behind the scenes". My part of the conversation in question is public - I was pinged as a gbdev Discord community member and that is the extent of my "consultancy". I also warned the GBcompo organizer that they should validate the rules' interpretation with a lawyer before trying to justify any requests that go beyond disqualification/delisting, particularly ones where finances get involved.
The comment about "burning bridges" is not a statement of intent, but of observation: if I publicly call someone out on the Internet, and we fail to reach a common agreement or understanding, that bridge inevitably becomes burned - even if I'm correct, even if most people agree with me! It was based on my understanding of how other people reacted to the controversy as it was brewing in community spaces, but I understand now how it could have been interpreted as a threat in its own right.
The reason I made a comment below the post (now deleted as per the game author's wishes) is because I saw him accusing the gbdev community of "censorship" - as such, I wanted to provide full transparency and accountability with regards to my role in the dispute. That was the extent of what I could do at the time, as someone who was never involved in the organization of gbcompo23 or any other gbdev community event and thus had no decision-making powers. I realized later that my stance led to harm. I regret getting involved in this at all, and I regret the things I said.
Limited participation in a community is not turning one's back on the community. What would that even mean? What kind of healthy community expects permanent loyalty from temporary participants?
> It is your right, you are correct in saying so, but ...
Manipulation and threats.
Personally, I believe it is appalling for Itch.io to benefit - from hard work submitted at GBCOMPO (Game Boy Competition) 23 - from a community member, then turn on that member and attempt to punish them financially or otherwise, for a lack of lifetime compliance, beyond good faith participation.
I've been a Linux user without Windows for longer than I can remember. My biggest worry is Linux dominates the market because a FOSS OS can't dominate the market. A capitalist market won't allow it. Of course though, if say Ubuntu was heavily monetized in some way, then it simply becomes the new Windows and the FOSS community will simply present an alternative. I'm sorry you had to go on this circular journey with me.
Because the monetization wouldn't work; anyone can just recompile the FOSS code and legally distribute a free build and users & PC manufacturers would flock to that.
That's already how it is, and yet the majority choose to pay for the convenience of two proprietary systems. We still haven't seen a FOSS offering that's well-suited for the typical end user IMHO.
