justinjlynn

At Intel, nobody pays the grad student proportionally for their massive contribution to the bottom line.

Yeah, people - in general - tend to do this with anything novel, sadly - especially novel design. See what Steve Balmer said about the iPhone for a commercial example. For Engineering examples, well, see the controversy around anything by Poettering (Systemd, PulseAudio, etc., etc.).

Are you certain that you're not playing with words to arrive at a predetermined conclusion? What is this "I" to which you're referring and how can you demonstrate that "I" does not or cannot exist within systems such as these? Further, if you are to find something which qualifies as an "I" elsewhere, what makes that elsewhere fundamentally different and therefore capable of supporting and being an "I" and is that elsewhere such simply by definition or in and of itself? Further, if the language usage is indistinguishable from the language usage of an "I", is the difference of source meaningful? If so, why?

I use AI systems to keep up with AI research. The telescoping has begun... and we're still near the bottom of the (super?)exponential curve.

Indeed, it's _you_ who are the human "resource" HR is managing.

Pratchett really got technology, imo. Sometimes it really is high energy magic, but most of the time it's just labourers you can't see being exploited. I especially enjoyed the line "money dangled is far more effective than money given" or something like that... it's true.

Scale-free infinity.

The statement "(A)GPL" probably should've been written "GPL/AGPL"... apologies for the miscommunication.

Yes. The (A)GPL is there for a good reason (in part, this one - ensuring one's work and other's work on it remains free and open source and commercial freeloaders can't get a free ride), and trademark law ensures you retain control of your software's brand. MIT and BSD... well, look where they come from - they're not designed with those purposes in mind. If you care about an aspect of a licensing solution, use a license designed and fit for purpose - just as you'd use a library designed and fit for purpose.

Boils down to: if they want to make an example out of you, they will find some way to do so.

Lobby to socialise or externalise all the costs. Work to privatise only the profits. Typical mode of operation.

(it's not a basket case because it's nationalised, it's nationalised because it's a basket case - thank the automotive industry - and it's a national security asset)

Insufficient and negligent quality control systems design permits a single point of failure in manufacturing process specifically designed and funded to prevent such things - calling into question the trustworthiness of the manufacturing process compliance for the entire product line.