I understand what you're saying, but as someone who spends most of the undirected Lego time with my daughter struggling to figure out what to build, I'm going to suggest that you have fallen into the trap of assuming that the way you do things is "correct" and not simply "the way I do things."
Extending this further, the belief that a competitor has an effective drug gaining traction in the market while you are still at an unpromising point in research could reasonably lead companies to focus their research elsewhere. After all, your costs don’t go down for research if a competitor is already delivering, but your likely returns do drop.
Absolutely. I’m surprised that the belief in much of the comments is that the technical input of developers (like myself) affects whether Oracle gets consideration.
Oracle gets consideration because teams want to have a lifeline if something goes wrong or (worst case) someone else to pin the blame on when it does. And this happens because some businesses are actually so big that that level of comfort doesn’t even dent the budget.
Oracle actually has some nice parts and some rough edges (a statement that applies equally to PG and SQL Server too, for instance), but it comes with a king-sized security blanket.
What is weird is that there are many good technical reasons to use Oracle. It's a very advanced and impressive database. The risks from doing business with Oracle are nearly all legal and business cost related. The sort of thing that are squarely under the supposed expertise of the non developer folks.
My objections against Oracle are not technical in nature. It is almost entirely cost and legal risk related.
> This does a bunch of Very Important Things that I don’t understand very well, including calling main. So I won’t explain them.
Honestly, this line was the best in the whole article. It felt like at that moment I knew the person talking to me wasn't trying to prove that they were some sage (personally guilty here) but instead of was someone who wanted to show me something cool that we could both enjoy.
That might be misunderstanding the role of copyright as it applies to the worlds we live in.
Many here see copyright as a critical tool necessary for the existence of copy-left licenses, licenses that we use to make sure that what we write stays open in a way that others can benefit from.
We rely on copyright to ensure that our code stays “Free as in speech” not simply “Free as in beer”. Simply accepting no form of creator control is at odds with our desire to make sure that the things we produce stay open for others to use since there is nearly no incentive for the next person to keep our code open.
While they might not charge you directly as a line item, you still get charged: Linode in the above list is what I use. I get a fixed cap of bandwidth each month. Anything beyond that is charged. So, you don't get charged IF you stay below the initial cap.
If anything you could say that AWS is the closest to actually having unlimited bandwidth (or at least, half-parity there) since they don't charge you for incoming data, where other VPS charge you for data both ways.
Really which has more or less expensive bandwidth comes down to the shape of your data usage.
Honestly, the first thing I'd do is hope that they forgot that I make house and car payments though them and that they forgot how much damage they could do to my professional life just by intentionally sabotaging my credit. Crypto doesn't provide any realistic protection to me from their whims should they become bad actors.
