You're right that can happen in most cases, but look at Microsoft's recent acquistions: LinkedIn, GitHub, Xamarin, and game studios like Mojang, Double Fine, Obsidian, and inXile. All well-established brand names that have continued to maintain their own identity and team culture, albeit like any culture I'm sure they've evolved over time.
Tell them what exactly? That's a case of a developer not wanting to continue maintaining an app on the platform. And thankfully WINE and Proton are able to pick up the slack and make the game playable without the support of the devs. Epic still wants to publish Fortnite on iOS, presumably, and in the meantime there isn't a way for them to do so without returning to the 30% cut.
> developer not wanting to continue maintaining an app on the platform.
This isn't what happened. Psyonix was perfectly happy with it and continued to expand and engage the wider PC gaming and modding community. Then Epic bought them for Rocket League's userbase and things reversed after the period of false assurances that nothing would change.
Epic is just a broken clock being right twice a day. Yes, what they're arguing for is sensible. But pretending that they're doing it to "Secure Freedoms for All" is absurd.
My reading of this is that there's nothing preventing them publishing a "free" Fortnite on iOS and offering only an off-device means of purchasing V-bucks. Basically, the Netflix model.
I think the issue is basically that their telemetry shows most iOS players being kids who may not have access to a computing device other than their phone, and who are on a fixed allowance. So they're not looking to save anyone money; they're looking to capture the other 30% of Timmy's lunch money.
This appears to be a move to meet package managers halfway. Yes, tools like npm and go have great integration with git repositories, but others like NuGet still require a hosting source. Long-term, you could imagine package managers forgoing their own hosting services in favor of letting GitHub be the primary host who takes on the issues of bandwidth, availability, access controls, etc. It's another vector for GitHub to compete in FOSS.
It’s also good for githubs economics to be able offload data from git itself to easily mirrored versioned tarballs. It’s much more cost effective than mirroring constantly changing master branches or worse whole git repos for clones.
No. So in his proposed system, we would define the procedure for making that information protected. The failure of our current government in this regard is that the default for any information is to classify it. There is more burden to create open documents than classified.
Or, better yet, a given set of information is automatically classified or not by virtue of what it is and what it's about, rather than an opt-in/opt-out system.
Of course, that's just the first step. Next we'd have to define who or what makes the determination for a given document.
And we'd have to define the granularity. Otherwise the system could be gamed in such a way that you could cause an entire document to be classified by inserting an otherwise unrelated footnote containing sensitive info.
In my experience, most information is classified by virtue of it being aggregated and manipulated on a classified system. The only way to declassify that information is to have someone laboriously scrub all the data you want to put on an unclassified system and get it approved. if your entire network is classified, there's going to be a lot of mundane stuff there that is classified by default, because securing such a network requires that people can't just take data off of it without oversight.
I have worked on classified systems. We would have rules drawn up for what was classified and what was not. If you can draw up clear rules with no edge cases, no missed possibly-leaky information, where decisions are unambiguous and 20 people would always make exactly the same decision for every piece of information, you should go file a patent for that method because it is a truly novel invention. And we were only covering a single tiny domain of data, not trying to build a rules set for all possible data that could ever exist.
My uncle in Kansas City runs a coffee shop that ran Starbucks of out business[1]. Starbucks brought coffee shops to the masses, but once people get hooked they generally like to support local craft shops that often taste better and feel more personal.
In addition to the other responses, when I was developing a game / game engine we chose Awesomium to render the UI to improve modding capabilities. A lot more people are willing to manipulate a website than some other scripting language. Planetary Annihilation had the same thought as well, if you want to see results on a published title.
They will apparently be playing Random Draft mode, which normally means that it works similarly to All Pick, except for the fact that the players pick from a pool of 50 random heroes. How this will work with the 18-hero pool is something I don't know.
It's not that clear. They call it "Random Draft", but this picking mode in Dota 2 doesn't mean "doing random picks". "Doing random picks" is the "All Random" mode.
There are a lot of factors that play into the speed (perceived and real) of an editor. Sublime is written in C, which is generally recognized as a performant language when used correctly. In contrast, Atom and VS Code are Electron[1] apps, which mean they have to deal with browser optimization. They both use a lot of tricks[2] to operate as quickly as they do. And in all editors, one bad extension can kill performance, from my recent experience Resharper in Visual Studio increases startup time by 3x.
An editor is not as simple as displaying lines of text a la Notepad, different editors optimize for different use cases.
