![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
The link I posted said this:
In the U.S., Google charges individual users $14 per month for YouTube Premium, which limits ads and offers a few additional features.
So it ‘limits ads’ which means there are still ads.
The link I posted said this:
In the U.S., Google charges individual users $14 per month for YouTube Premium, which limits ads and offers a few additional features.
So it ‘limits ads’ which means there are still ads.
People at the Post Office and Fujitsu need to go to jail over this.
It won’t happen. They’ll get away with it. Same as ever.
I wasn’t implying criticism isn’t allowed.
But opinions on what somebody should do with their time and project are just that.
Feedback must be given in a respectful way or it’s not effective. That often doesn’t happen with open-source projects and until we change the culture around open-source, this is going to just keep happening.
Opinions ate like assholes. Everybody has one. Doesn’t mean its relevant or important. The number of intelligent people who confuse opinion with fact never fails to astound me.
I agree.
Playing Devils Advocate it sounds like the options, for them, would be to stop providing a non-paying version entirely.
I understand where they are coming from but providing an open source version that won’t get timely security updates feels like it would be more trouble than it’s worth to use.
If they only want to work on a version that pays for their time I’d suggest they make the whole thing closed source.
The self-entitlement in open-source has to stop. This is only one example of a maintainer quitting. There are many more.
And the shaming of projects who want to make money to sustain their projects also has to stop. Nothing is free. Somebody is paying for it in time, resources or money.
If you don’t like what a project is doing, or how they’re monetizing, don’t use it. Move on.
That was really interesting to read. A lot of people have been saying that Twitter had got a lot worse since ManBaby came along. Not being a user anymore I have nothing to dispute that with.
What is interesting is the companies who are arguably making it ‘worse’ (partly) are backing that statement up by saying it’s better than it was for them. Easier to do business. Easier to make money. Easier to make it worse.
I suppose that’s what happens when the owner sees moderation of this type of content as ‘censorship’.
Twitter users confuse me. Maybe they double-down on the moderation of their own bubble so it’s not quite as bad for them.
I may have missed something.
This sounds like it would be the expected behaviour?
This sounds like a good thing?
This sounds like a good thing?