He had an interview with Google and they asked him to invert a binary tree, which is essentially taking a tree of data and swapping the positions of all sibling nodes.
While most people agreed it was a pretty pointless question to ask at an interview, mxcl had a full “don’t you know who I am” shit fit on social media.
If anyone hasn’t made the connection, mxcl is the infamous Google interview binary tree guy
It wasn’t about video length, it was about the Twitter leadership at that time being categorically incapable of monetizing any of their products.
Combine that with the orders-of-magnitude higher cost of running Vine compared to the bird, and it was always either going to be sold off or shut down.
It’s easy to forget that this was back in the time when these companies thought they were changing the planet for the better and drinking their own Kool aid by the gallon.
Which is also exactly how Signal works too; I migrated both two days ago. Process was virtually identical.
I much prefer Signal, but can’t judge WhatsApp to harshly on this tbh.
Mark Zuckerberg needs to tread carefully or he might have to spend another afternoon answering the nonsensical questions of a bunch of geriatric luddites.
“made”
my
fReE sPeEcH PuRiSt
The useful idiot certainly keeps himself busy doesn’t he
I mean, yeah, doesn’t everyone?
This is also slightly off. It was primarily to eliminate third party apps from the existing landscape. Reddit want money from users in one of two ways:
Due to the extortionate pricing, (2) was only ever hypothetical. In reality there was no sustainable model for this for any third party app, even as a non-profit.
The case around AI does exist, but it was smoke and mirrors for Reddit pulling the same nonsense that Twitter did once they realized they might get away with it, regardless of the short term damage it would do to their public image.
Yes it’s called ‘You left your carbon footprints on my heart’
nothing purrsonal kit
Great, now I have to worry about this every time I order a curry
Plato’s Rust cave base
As a software user, you can either care about your privacy or not. Caring about your privacy and not either vetting what you’re planning to use or checking that someone else has before using it, is akin to sticking your hand in a fire to find out if it’s hot.
Taking that analogy further, malicious open source software is kind of like a burning building. It only takes one person to raise the flag for it to spread pretty quickly through social media or other means that it is malicious. The whole community doesn’t need to acknowledge the fire for something to be done about it.
That they leak information? I work in commercial software development and I have to do a lot of open source security reviews. The answer is: virtually none.
Private, closed-source software on the other hand… If it could sniff your farts and send the smell to advertisers, it would; in almost all cases.
The app is open source so you can review the not-leaking-your-information that it does yourself.
Windows on the other hand …
It depends on your intent. If you’re doing it to keep history clean and linear in the long term, it’s a huge waste of time as it gets splatted into a single squashed merge commit. It also makes it difficult for reviewers to rereview your changes as GitHub/Lab can’t calculate the diff because you keep moving the goalposts with force pushes.
If you’re doing it for cleanliness on your local branch then I guess that’s fine, but I find it anti-social in a multi participant repo.
That’s the one, and you’re right, it is currently a rebrand but ultimately the same product.
I think having separate apps is the wrong way to go for their “integrate everything in one place” philosophy, over the longer term. I’m eager to see what they do with it next.
It’s more about scale. Small open source projects might get one PR a month. Your average tech company is dealing with dozens of PR every single day. Review fatigue is real in these environments