What if I told you

Maybe we can at least get meritocracy back?

If you're code isn't under a license that insists all distributors must say so, then no it doesn't have to be acknowledged.
>Also, blew up your cover, M$ shill
Keep talkin JS soiboi

*blocks your path*

Attached: 1519299351627.png (3824x1592, 1.66M)

fuck off shill

Attached: 1507138356274.png (800x533, 604K)

>let Google slide
You must be new here

ES uses JIT compilation, so yeah, you do need a compiler.
Also you're a dumbass.
>Their code, meant to do the same thing as mine, does things similarly to mine!
Sure, they probably did get the inspiration for the additions to Rush from how Lerna did things, but do you really want to say that taking a similar approach to open source code is the same thing as using that open source code? In that case, React is in serious trouble as well, taking the approach toward using immutability to check for state changes from Om and all.
With any luck MS will make an official interface—That of course is run through Azure.
Gotta make money off that free software somehow, and MS's answer to "How will it make money?" seems to just be shouting "Azure!" until they're blue in the face.

>That diversity flat design on the bottom right.
As a straight white guy, I kind of regret taking CompSci knowing this would overshadow everything. But I feel no field is safe anyway.

Attached: dumbanddumberanddumberanddumberand.gif (300x225, 2.76M)

It uses a method often used in compilers, doesn't make it any less than an interpreter, dumbass.

Cont'd it's a Transpiler

>If you're code isn't under a license that insists all distributors must say so, then no it doesn't have to be acknowledged.
"The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."
see

If Microsoft truly didn't acknowledge their redistribution, then yes that is wrong.

Now revisit how Microsoft killed Nokia by planting a mole into the company.
>Implant senior business manager into nokia
>crush the company from within, stocks reduce from 33% to 3%
>buy it out
>Release windows phones
>People don't like Microsoft so it fails
>Eventually kill the company

B-but Symbian was a burning platform and Maemo or whatever was a waste of time.

can you retards please stop posting this

Nokia was DOA with poor business decisions, not being able to keep up with the rise of Smartphones. Same goes for Blackberry, Same goes for Windows Phone anything.

Nokia created the smartphone.

>decisions
By Elope, a former microsoft employee

don't be mistaken, this move wasn't made to put off the open source community, this move was made by microsoft _specifically_ to put increased heat onto Amazon and bezos. All new direction within github will focus on feature integration with Azure, TFS, VS, and the like.

This isn't anti-linux/FOSS it's anti/bezos. Jow Forums just needs to decide whose dick they care less about sucking.

Attached: background_206.jpg (1280x933, 392K)

>if you dont want people to steal your things dont leave them inside your car

Attached: 1503578671051.png (640x480, 348K)

Yeah, and they couldn't keep up with the competition.
>By Elope, a former microsoft employee
Okay? An individual who worked at Microsoft
Yeah, that's general street smarts

My god, has Jow Forums become the new /vg/?
I can't believe I'm surrounded by so many retards.

>An individual who worked at Microsoft
A mole, implanted by Microsoft. After joining Nokia, Elop issued a company internal memo titled "Burning Platform"[29] which was leaked to the press.[30] The memo likened the 2010 situation of Nokia, in the smartphone market, to a person standing on a burning oil platform ("platform" being a reference to the name given to operating systems such as Symbian, Apple iOS and Google Android). By some in the media, the memo was seen as a wake-up call for Nokia,[31] whereas Nokia's Board of Directors saw the memo as act of misjudgment and Chairman Jorma Ollila gave bitter feedback for it at a board meeting.[32]

This leaked memo coined a term "Elop effect", a catastrophic combination of the Ratner effect (publicly attacking one's own products) and the Osborne effect (promising a successor to a current product too long before it is available).

>Microsoft corporate spy walks into Nokia and tells them already known dead Operating System is dead.

Still Nokias fault for putting themselves in the hands of a company widely known to have little success in Smartphones.

Attached: windowsmobile.jpg (600x600, 67K)

>publicly attacking own product
>promissing a successor to a current product too long before it's available
Sure, no harmful intentions
How low will you go to defend Microsoft?

n 2000, an extension to the Kerberos networking protocol (an Internet standard) was included in Windows 2000, effectively denying all products except those made by Microsoft access to a Windows 2000 Server using Kerberos. The extension was published through an executable, whose running required agreeing to an NDA, disallowing third party implementation (especially open source). To allow developers to implement the new features, without having to agree to the license, users on Slashdot posted the document (disregarding the NDA), effectively allowing third party developers to access the documentation without having agreed to the NDA. Microsoft responded by asking Slashdot to remove the content. The Microsoft extensions to Kerberos, as introduced in binary form in Windows 2000, have since been described in RFC 3244 and RFC 4757, and these extensions have since been listed in Microsoft Open Specification Promise. This document relates to "Microsoft-owned or Microsoft-controlled patents that are necessary to implement" the technologies listed. Microsoft's legal statement concerning unrestricted use of Microsoft intellectual property also includes the Kerberos Network Authentication Service v5 (RFC 1510 and RFC 1964).

You're digging up crap from over 10 years ago, did you read my OP?

10 years ago isn't the 90s

Attached: Screenshot-2018-6-5 What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub · Jacques Mattheij.png (2637x5892, 866K)

>microsoft magically changed its entire business strategy and philosophy in the year of 2008

I fucking hate github, such a pain in the ass to use

>2000
>1999+1
Sooo sorry user, you got me!
Being this fussy about exact years

It would be nice to just create a repo and upload code by mouse.

You seem confused. I carry a gun and don't leave valuables in my car. That doesn't mean I excuse thieving behavior by saying "well its your fault for tempting the poor thief".

Attached: 1507175605046.png (331x304, 67K)

They're still pushing proprietary non-standard crap to lock developers and software to their platform.
They're still trying to lock down PCs even more restricting them to only running software from their store.
Internet Explorer still exists and still vastly inferior to the competition.

Sure Apple is now doing all this same shit including neglecting their browser to try to force devs to waste time on native apps, but really both of these companies are still abusing the position their duopoly grants them to suppress competition that would benefit everyone.

Mmm No, I understand your logic, I just disagree.
The thief is still in the wrong for stealing, but the victim is a fool for leaving his valuables in the car.

>They're still pushing proprietary non-standard crap to lock developers and software to their platform.
Yes user if you use proprietary developer tools, expect proprietary lock-ins.

>They're still trying to lock down PCs even more restricting them to only running software from their store.
I can still download exe's from outside the Windows store, no idea what you're talking about.

>Internet Explorer still exists and still vastly inferior to the competition.
Are you 12? lmgtfy.com/?q=How do I download Google Chrome

Posts on the internet from the late 90s and early 2000s shitting on Microsoft don't feel any different from a post written in this decade.

They didn't put themselves in that position they were sabotaged from the inside because of an employee with loyalty to a competing company.

Haha Github might look so friendly and great run by Microsoft now and this is fine but I will say this but once, read very carefully:

GITHUB WILL NEVER BE TRUSTED AGAIN!

Traitor!

Oh hi other open source dev collab places. Nice to meet you.

Githubexit.

Attached: artbsod.jpg (620x465, 69K)

A "transpiler" is hipster garbage term for a compiler. Read a book for once. Preferably one that rigorously defines the term "compiler".

Basic summary of what happen.

Idiot thinks MIT License protects his idea, doesn't understand FOSS, Microsoft basically rewrites his project and he cries it about.

If they're not using your source code than the MIT license does not apply buddy. It's not a patent.

They didn't steal your code, the code is completely different.

Check both repositories; it's not even remotely similar.

Sorry man, they stole your idea. MIT shit license doesn't protect ideas, patents do.

>What if I told you Microsoft isn't nearly as bad as they were in the 90s and buying GitHub really isn't that big of deal.
Actually, I'm not afraid of Microsoft's evil intentions on this one.

I'm just afraid that they're going to shipwreck a service that I use, like they did with Skype.

Things that worry me:
>forced live-accounts for signons, like they did with Skype
>ads everywhere
>constantly pushing integration with their own services (azure, tfs, visual studio) and neglecting that people like to use travis or other ci stuff

Basically, I'm just worried that they're going to turn the service shit, like they do with everything else they touch.

>Microsoft isn't nearly as bad as they were in the 90s
LOL
Microsoft in the 90's was releasing shit products.
Microsoft now releases shit products and adds a lot of spyware and adds on top of them.

Microsoft is actually way worse now than it was during the 90s.
Windows was, until Windows 2000, an OS actually made for professional use, intuitive and not bloated. Not to mention that telemetry and spyware weren't nearly as bad as Windows 10.
Look at them now.
Windows is a completely unusable bess since 8, none of their remote services are better than the competition, and they kill.off companies they buy.
Microsoft is a zombie. It literally lives off its monopoly on PCs, which are now used less and less by normies in favor of smartphones.
Microsoft will inevitably fail at this pace, unless they pull out some ground-breaking, mind-blowing innovarive idea (which is unlikely).
Note that I didn't even take into account that most of their stuff is proprietary crap.

If it's patentable that would mean he could fuck them in the ass.

> forced live-accounts for signons, like they did with Skype
Wuh? I'm still using my original Skype login, no microsoft accounts

>I'm still using my original Skype login
They made a shadow live account. You have a live account now, user. Go to live.microsoft.com and log in with your skype username.

>What if I told you Microsoft isn't nearly as bad as they were in the 90s
True. In some aspects they're far, far worse.

hey Microsoft shill..
you are self-aware thats a good first step..

>What if I told you Microsoft isn't nearly as bad as they were in the 90s
except they are, if anything they're worse because they've been taken over by poojeets

>buying GitHub really isn't that big of deal
correct but only because github was already dead

Forgot your OP. Ya fucking cocksucker.
>>>reddit.

>Recommends Google Chrome
Brainlet confirmed

Fair enough. live.microsoft.com doesn't exist but I went to the microsoft account sign in page and logged in successfully. It didn't let me do anything though, saying I need to add either an email or a phone number, at which point I obviously fucked off.

You're playing right into their hands if you think a big corporation can be trusted or considered "not as bad", especially one like Microsoft which basically has the stranglehold on consumer operating systems.
>But of course you'll disagree because we love to hate Microsoft, and let Google slide as they own half the internet.
Meanwhile you're giving Microsoft a free pass because they're "not so bad" as they were in the 90s and because you think a huge corporation making money on making proprietary, closed source products buying the biggest open source platform out there "isn't that big of a deal".
Never give big corporations a free pass, always watch what they do, always see an ulterior motive. Microsoft has become "less bad" in your eyes, that's exactly why they hire a fucking huge PR department to handle any and all PR damage they have suffered.

The only corporation that can be trusted is one that's 100% transparent with its policies and the products it provides, Microsoft is the complete opposite - the only product they're "transparent" with is VScode. They used it to appease the retarded part (majority) of the open source community, make them a bit less hostile, before buying out Github. It worked.
>Embrace - make small contributions to open source projects and open source a shitty fork of Atom
>Extend - add a Linux subsystem in Windows, acquire the biggest open source platform
>Extinguish
If you think Microsoft isn't as bad then you let yourself be manipulated.

Microsoft is making computers great again and there's NOTHING you can do about it neckbeard.

Forgot your OP.

Computers were never great.

Attached: afterMS.png (1024x542, 979K)