We are in the exact same boat. We've been with them since 2002 (when it was still SWReg). We should have switched back in August when they changed the agreement and postponed payment till 60 days. It sounded 'legit' but it should have been a red flag. Yesterday we made the final changes to migrate over to PayProGlobal, and had our first order processed this morning. We have no illusions we'll ever get the money DR/MyCommerce owes us. It all sucks, tho in hindsight we were too naive and trusted them too much. Never again.
I'd happily pay for such an image hosting. Our gallery site Hall of Framed (https://framedsc.com/HallOfFramed/) with the best virtual photography shots from our Discord community is hosted this way (json file with the urls in a github repo, updated by a bot, the site is hosted on github pages). We directly pull the shots from discord, but we now have to refactor the site so the images are hosted elsewhere.
This poses a problem as the amount of shots is quite large... We have a channel where users post their shots, and the bot basically harvests the links of the shots which have a high amount of votes. So currently no re-hosting of images occurs.
I can image tho why Discord does this. Our gallery is likely not visited a lot, but I can imagine high profile files pulled from discord channels like pirated software/malware etc. are a big problem. The route to the server / channel where the files are coming from isn't known, only to discord
Going out of beta in a few days: https://github.com/SolutionsDesign/HnD (and already in production). Customer support system. .NET core, asp.net core mvc.
They also kicked out Karl Peterson, who designed the first MVP logo (the diamond with the large MVP inside it) and wrote about 3000+ reply posts a year in various visual basic groups. The reason? He was a VB6 MVP and very vocal against VB.NET. Yes, you can't have the spear head of a community you just kicked in the nuts with a 'VB.NET' in the program that is designed to promote that successor tech, now can we...
I've been a C# MVP for many years before they didn't renew me because I was too critical towards MS' direction (this was before they OSS-ed .NET). When I was awarded, it felt like I received an award for my position in the .NET community. When I didn't get a renewal years later it felt like I didn't get it because I didn't fit into their marketing machine. It was fine by me btw. The free MSDN universal subscription is nice, but that's about it.
> ServiceStack has been a valuable contribution to the .NET community, and your continued development/support of it should defacto make you an MVP.
Yes, and back in the days when I received my MVP title, this kind of thinking was part of the criteria. Nowadays... no way. It started 7-8 years ago I think when they decided there couldn't be more than X mvp's for a given category and they wanted at least Y mvp's in a given region. So less in the west, and more in say India. While it's fine to make it a more world-wide program and recognize people in communities which are less known to people in 'the west', the criteria to accomplish this changed with it: if you started a user group somewhere in a region without an mvp and someone nominated you, you had a good chance becoming one.
This is all OK btw, if your criteria is about evangelizing. If your criteria is about 'the people who are the most skilled in ABC' then it's not. So this shift in who would receive the award changed the program.
Nowadays it's rather silly tbh. If you want to get renewed you have to fill in a form where you describe why you want to get renewed. wtf... it's an award you receive. Why would you need to tell MS why you'd want to receive an award you haven't received yet as they decide who gets it...
Or you know, Google could have emailed them, told them exactly that and waited for a response before pulling the plug on the servers.
While you make sense from Google's PoV, it doesn't from the customer's PoV. As google is a big corp, it's IMHO better to side with the customer here, as next time it might be you who's getting screwed over by Google/other corp.
I think they still are mainly focused on their ad business as the core of the company and cloud is something they 'do on the side'. For Microsoft, Azure is core business, it's the future of the company. If they fuck it up, they're dead. Google apparently doesn't see their cloud offering as their core business and therefore doesn't get the attention it needs.
- It gives then 'streetcred' in the OSS communities using GitHub. This goodwill is valuable.
- It allows them to peek into any private repo on GH right from their own office. All major players host code there, likely a lot of them in private repos too. Microsoft has a large trackrecord of 'me too' products (i.e. the ones released after the original from another company is successful) and corporate espionage isn't something that's just happening in the movies. This too could make things very profitable
- Developer relations across private repos could increase the value of linkedin profiles which in turn could make that more valuable.
But that's about what I could come up with. I seriously don't understand why one would spent $2B on github if it hosts your OSS stuff. Also, to make sure VSTS become more successful with an integration doesn't make sense to me: GH isn't the most profitable service out there and was losing money. Hell it might even go belly up sooner or later and VSTS would look to be a better alternative.
> or we may just post the commit in chat for review before we build out.
Isn't that 'after the fact', considering your teamcity polls the gitlab repo a lot, so a commit will trigger a build right after it, and if everything goes well, deploy it too?
So you have to know up front whether a thing is 'risky', but that's a subjective term.
> The whole point of Core is that MS have rewritten .Net and ASP to learn the lessons of more modern languages. ASP.NET 4.6 is standing on 19 years of cruft which is why it has so many weird and complicated parts.
MS hasn't rewritten .NET, most code is simply ported from .NET full. ASP.NET has been rewritten, but only a part of it (the rest is simply not implemented (yet)). '19' years of cruft? .NET 1.0 was released in 2002, not sure where your 19 years come from. Besides, it's better to use a framework that actually works and does whatever you throw at it, than some hip new thing that can only do a few tricks today and perhaps learns a few more tomorrow. You know, clients and all, they want to use the stuff you write and not have to stare at things that break down / crash.
If 'core' stuff is optional, it's not core at all, it's optional. Core material is the core of something. So naming things 'core' is stupid if it's not the core of something.
Here, the .NET core libraries/frameworks are a different direction. They're not core, but they're not to be seen as 'optional'. They're to be seen as 'alternative' to .NET full. Not a great alternative today, as many features are lacking and they're really rushing things towards a pretty stupidly set deadline (when you're adding features to a RC2, you're not doing it right), but perhaps someday.
Hierarchy is not only there for 'telling X to do ABC', but also to make clear who takes responsibility. If there's no leader, who's responsible for decisions taken? A random person who happens to be in a team who did something which turned out to be very stupid? All of them? No one? When a decision is made by X, the people who execute it didn't decide on it, X did, which means X takes responsibility, not the people who execute the decision.
Another aspect which is overlooked in the article is: to get things done, you have to make unpopular decisions sometimes: i.e. cut features to make a deadline, to ship a version, to stop adding stuff and work towards a release. No-one wants to make those, they're called 'unpopular' for a reason. But you have to make them to avoid a state where things aren't ready and never will be. There's a difference between 'being able to ship' and 'being able to ship a usable product'.
Funny that they refer to Valve with the text:
> At the video-game maker Valve, new employees are told not to expect instructions, because even the managing director “isn’t your manager,” says the employee handbook. “You have the power to green-light projects. You have the power to ship products.” And so they do.
Blendle offers articles across various outlets. It's a dataminer's dream: they can monitor the interests of the readers of the articles like no online newspaper/article site can as they can track what readers read across various sites, how long the reader is paying attention, how it is shared, with whom, in what order they're reading the articles etc. etc.
This is also the downside of this system: Blendle can create a very detailed profile of your interests and thus you. This is very sad, as Blendle isn't free, so you pay for the articles you read not only with money but also with your privacy, and with no influence on what will happen with the profile data Blendle created.
I know the group of people who is concerned about their privacy is small (or not big enough, I'd say), and this might look like paranoid whining, but in case you didn't realize this: now you do :)
Nothing will change. Remember, the XBox One sports a Blu-ray drive, made by their archenemy Sony. (maybe not physically made by Sony, but most patents regarding Bluray are in Sony's hands)