nknighthb

Your concerns apply equally to software aggregations generally -- e.g. every Linux distribution.

Import paths are not the appropriate method of providing "credit". That's the sort of thing that is handled by copyright notices, documentation, and metadata.

It's generally preferred that if you're using a software distribution, you either test bugs against a "pure" upstream version before reporting them, or report them to the maintainers of the distribution, who can triage and, when appropriate, forward bug reports upstream (possibly with patches).

All Linux distributions consist primarily of third-party code.

I don't know what you mean by "arbitrary", though. It makes no sense in context, and is notably at odds with your earlier use of the word "curated". Nobody ships random code. That wouldn't be curated, nor would it be useful.

> I'm confused, is this a curated set of existing Go libraries, or a brand-new set of libraries?

Toward the bottom of the page they talk about contributing back to open source projects and sponsoring the development of some packages, so it certainly appears to be a curated set of existing Go libraries.

> If the former, how are they going to guarantee their "3 years of bug fixes"?

Red Hat provides 10+ years on the code they ship. What's so shocking about 3?

Your view is one of the worst types of conservative inhumanity and I honestly am repulsed by it.

> Where was the robber's empathy and humanity when he decided to commit a violent crime?

Where was ours when we drove him to that crime?

> I can think of a few better candidates for your poster boy of injustice.

Unlike some people, I don't feel it is morally appropriate to pick and choose who gets justice.

The comment I responded to said "And mass pardons of federal prison could hint the governors about their power too.". This suggests two mistaken beliefs:

1) That governors as a whole have these powers.

2) That "hints about their power" would prompt them to act in the manner he wishes.

The governors don't need hints about their power in this area, they are well aware of it. They don't fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they need a "hint", they fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they do not agree with him.

I'm not addressing the thread as a whole. I'm addressing this little corner of it. I'm under no obligation to address the thread as a whole in every comment I make, and doing so would be both pointless and tiring.

Whatever justice is, it cannot be the vengeful, racist, wealth-centered system we have now. Nor can it possibly be found in the the mind of anyone prone to uttering the phrase "fuck this guy".

Whatever justice is, it cannot be forfeiting our own empathy and humanity.

1) The governors have powers that vary from zilch to equal to the President's. This is determined state-by-state.

2) You are mistaken if you believe all or even a substantial minority of the governors would ever agree with your views in this matter.

The offenses were not against the United States. This man is in a Colorado prison for crimes under Colorado law. The President has no authority in this case.

There is only one correct response: "We thank the researchers who pointed out our mistakes, and apologize to all voters for our failure to adequately secure a vital system.".

The only correct response now, on the other hand, is the immediate firing of this "CIO", who clearly does not have the mentality necessary to be a CIO or a public servant.

> You wouldn't agree that more than a few percent of the kind of people who were already heavy office PC users back in 1985 now use laptops on aeroplanes, in hotel rooms or at conferences or other people's offices?

No, I wouldn't. Hotel room is more likely, but is just substituting for home/office.

Huge numbers of heavy office PC users exist. Only a tiny fraction use a laptop anywhere but home or the office, and a tinier fraction of those do so routinely. It is a niche market.

> the "vast majority" of US business travellers who travel with a laptop

There aren't that many business travelers in the first place. You're already looking at a niche market.

> I promise you that the market for laptops back around 1989-90, when they started to be a real commercial hit, was not dominated by people who only wanted to shuttle theirs back and forth between home and work

My argument: On-the-go laptop use is niche.

Your apparent reply: Early laptop users used them on-the-go.

It's a non sequitur. That the ideal market for a product adopts the product does not mean that the market is not niche. The two have no relationship.