They sell the cheating tool and the detection software
They sell the cheating tool and the detection software
Sure till they copystrike their own subs
Everyone knows after any commercial success the best thing you can do is rebrand by announcing the death of the successful product \s
Your username is not the best ever. Why are you lying?
You must starve for your ethics obviously \s
Yeah I don’t trust the good will of corporations, even the ones I personally like
Yeah GOG is a better ownership model. Steam is not ownership
I mean I hate to say it but if steam closed up shop tomorrow your games are gone too. You buy a license, not a copy, from steam
Yes and there are definitely people who use excel for art. Just like there are people who use GitHub for its releases page. It’s just not the primary use of either program.
A huge chunk of GitHub users? Citation needed. Sounds like what you mean is you and your communities use it that way.
I mean I did try. They didn’t really listen, just repeated the same thing over and over again.
No, what you mean is YOU use it and you’re assuming most people use GitHub the way you do. GitHub is first and foremost a platform for GIT. Git has nothing to do with releases or file downloads per se. Time spent improving the releases UI is time not spent doing other UI improvements. If you need more proof that it’s not worth it to spend time on the release UI, just take note of the fact that GitHub is not spending time on the release UI. If everyone was using it and it was deficient, do you really think that would be the case?
Literally everyone? I’ve been a software engineer for ten years. My company doesn’t use it, and no company I’ve worked for has. I guess they are not part of “literally everyone?”
Explain to me how GitHub working on one product feature (releases) has no impact on how much they can work on others. Apparently in your rich enterprise software career you’ve found that resources and time are limitless? Or maybe you think it’s trivial for a platform like GitHub to change their UI.
This smacks of lots junior software engineers I’ve worked with who think problems are simple and solutions are easy because they’ve never actually DONE anything. I get that you’re very convinced that this is easy and cost less but it’s pretty clear to me you have no idea what you’re talking about.
We’re talking about how to design one of the biggest platforms on the internet. Of course there is a compromise. No one is advocating for removing the button, but arguing that the UI is somehow deficient for people wanting to download binaries is really missing the purpose of GitHub.
Do MOST people who use GitHub download .exes? In my experience the VAST majority of people are using it for source and version control, not external releases. The overwhelming majority. FOSS and OSS is a small portion of the overall GitHub user base compared to, say, enterprise companies.
Excel has a bad UX for people who want to use it to make art
In a Bayesian sense this would be called updating your prior. You assume the wheel is truly random. After many observations that assumption seems not to hold so you adjust your prior probability that any given spin will land on black to be higher.
The whole point is deliberate engagement and sharing. Don’t like the content coming out of an instance? Don’t federate with them. It allows communities to stay small and focused, or grow large and be a big tent, according to their users.
This doesn’t help you but may help others. I always run my updates and deletes as selects first, validate the results are what I want including their number and then change the select to delete, update, whatever
THE hacker news?