This reminded me of an issue with emoji in slack...
then you type ":)" slack changes it to the emoji, but when you hover over it you see ":slightly_smiling_face:"... the first time I saw this I thought that the message was passive aggressive... it was later that I realize that slack does the change automatically
there is not only the fact that they need to be developed... if I remember correctly they gave dates to have them in production. maybe she felt she could not have them done on time.
Science is never done, or at least it shouldn't be. We create models and update them or change them as we get more evidence and the technological advancements allow us to perform better tests.
Gravity was not done with Newton. sure, it's a great model to explain how objects are attracted to each other, but Einstein came alone and proved that that the model was not correct and it made incorrect assumptions (constant time for example).
I think that is the great misunderstanding. We expect science to give us final answers. We expect it to study something and then be "done". But that is not the case.
He went to europe while they were in the middle of crunch time, then promptly took a week of sick time upon his return. They fired him shortly thereafter. Steve talks about it here:
In Aaron's words: "Yeah. I was unhappy working in an office and didn’t hide it. So I’d come in late and set up lots of off-site meetings and stuff. And my boss wasn’t really thrilled about that. Also, I think he was upset about me disappearing for so long on vacation. One of the places I went to in Europe was the Chaos Computer Conference. And while I was there I hung out with my friend Quinn Norton, who was reporting on the event for Wired. She took my photo for one of her articles and it was featured on wired.com’s front page. “Heh,” I joked. “I bet the first time my boss finds out where I am is when he sees my photo on the front page of his own website.”"
So yeah, he earned his firing and the emnity of his coworkers the old-fashioned way.
Edit: Also, there's some speculation on the thread I linked to that Aaron was a cofounder who received a payout in the CN deal. He wrote web.py, sure, but if he walked away with $1MM+ without showing up to work, that could explain why they still hate his guts.
I know nothing of the internal arrangements and disputes. But knowing how these things often go, it's easy to imagine that Aaron was tangentially involved, and the Reddit team needed more help, but Aaron still had another project, where his 'founding' stake/claim was larger.
Offering a founder-ish stake and founder-ish title for bringing that other project in-house (even if the combined team pursues something else) is a common resolution to such a situation.
they discontinued google gears support. yesterday when I tried to access Remember the milk (as a chrome-web-app) and it showed me an error message, when I tried to install the plug-in it said that it wasn't supported.
this is one of the disadvantages of the automatic update process I guess.
hey, I clicked the "buy the digital version" in chrome and I got this http://imgur.com/GYcrR (page not available). i tried in Firefox and it worked... maybe you want to check that out.
Even I am struggling to understand how exactly did this violate ToS?
Was it "illegal code/file"? No! It was a file to a s/w that had the potential to be used maliciously, but the file uploaded itself wasn't, but hadn't really manifested in that form (yet).
I feel asking the dev to take down the Github project is ok, but blocking/restricting access to the file itself, until proven malicious was a bad idea. And if that part about taking down the HN is true, its a dick move.
Yes, its their platform and from an ethical stand point, being proactive this way helps everyone, but it could have been handled better.
Agree the Dropship s/w itself was in some violation of the ToS, but was the file that was uploaded to the public dropbox share in violation? What I am trying to separate here is, how could Dropbox the company "determine" the uploaded file indeed was the Dropship s/w? [I know in this case it was obvious as the dev had probably linked to it].
I am trying to pose a question to a different level, where how can/will dropbox scrutinize each uploaded file in this manner without actually receiving a DMCA from a third person?
And Dropbox hasn't done anything to any users of the code, as far as I know. What do you think Dropbox is doing to people who poke at the code or use it?
"This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the project source code from the user’s Dropbox because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user."
I'm questioning whether possessing the file without using it against Dropbox is actually a TOS violation.
