LaRakel

It's more that there a lot more factors than quality, like there being no competing projects or it being useful to a lot of people. Writing a quality project only gives it better odds than if the same thing was written shoddily.

You're right. Still I can compare doing web development using ruby on rails with doing it in php without a framework.

I've done both, rails was much more pleasurable. See? I just compared the overall experience of a language with that of a framework.

You can't skim over audio recordings

The benefit is that the electricity bill goes to the owners of the infected computers.

What does a botnet cost?

There are bitcoin exchanges using various methods, for example by SEPA bank transfer. I think many people without credit cards can use Paypal but don't want to.

Whether or not you keep using a service, it's good to voice your opinion on bad policy, because every so often a company listens to its users.

Besides marketshare, bad press has an impact as well. Leaving a service is NOT the only way of protest.

I do interpret what you wrote as a slightly less sensitive version of "If you don't like it, then leave," type of comment.

That type of comment is doesn't say anything, there's no real argument in it. It's simply dismissing criticism. You can dismiss any criticism whatsoever using it.

The sweeping "if you don't like it leave" doesn't really work. There's good reasons to use a platform despite deficiencies, no platform is exactly how I'd do it. Perhaps Google+ is technologically better, or the audience on Google+ is better for what I have to say. Maybe I want to keep in touch with real life acquaintances and they are on Google+. Do I have to convince every contact I have to switch to a platform that is worse in different ways?

Even if I vehemently disagree with their stance on publishing your true identity; there's reasons to use a platform despite it and keep complaining about their bad policies.

I get loads of "opportunities", by HR people from employment agencies that never even had contact with the company they'll be presenting me to. By comparison, companies doing the same thing isn't that bad.

Pseudonymity for everyone helps the ones who do need it, because then they don't stand out.

If you're not part of any minority or have no radical politics, yeah you might not need it. But even then, you would want the comfort of the advertising industry and your future employer not being able to disrespect your privacy. (Public data and privacy? Yes.)

Why then is it good to kick people out for using pseudonyms? Why does it have to be a requirement? Do the benefits of real names even compare to the benefits of pseudonymity? I don't think they do.

Don't go to work and abandon your family! That book won't write itself. Think positive!

According to that same TOS, users outside the US and Canada are giving their data to Facebook Europe in Ireland. So they have to follow Irish law, which they don't.

Europe's Data Directive applies to all users outside of the US and Canada. The data directive gives me the right to ask them all data they have on me, and the right to have them remove it.

As a European they have given me that right by setting up a company in Ireland.

html5? how irrelevant.

The only thing html5 about this is the doctype, a header and a footer tag. The maps are svg not canvas.