Many hardware products are built with licensed code. It cannot be released because the company doesn’t own all of it.
There’s also more to a product than just some source code. You’d need the cloud domains, the private keys and certificates, and other bits. Releasing many of these to the public domain wouldn’t solve anything because you’d need someone to operate the cloud servers at the known address and trust with the private keys and certificates
All of this quickly begins to look a lot like requiring someone to operate the business again, which is obviously a silly thing to require in bankruptcy proceedings.
Forcing companies to release their IP if they go bankrupt is equally silly, because it renders the value of the company’s IP as $0 before anyone can be paid out.
The only thing this would incentivize is for companies to either relocate to countries with sane laws, or to shut off the servers and avoid bankruptcies by keeping the company technically alive but doing nothing other than staying as a registered business. It would act as a holding company to keep the IP in case someone wanted to buy it.
The TTRPG community demonstrated how G+ circles solved how people segment different parts of their social lives by limiting the scope to a specific community and cause. Most people in that space were heavily invested in that community but also didn't want it being their primary public identity.
But the community is so minuscule that I'm not sure Google even knew it existed. If it had taken off to the same degree among something closer to critical mass, like today's parasocial celebrity communities or mainstream sports, it might've survived.
IMO most of that TTRPG community migrated to Discord, but the invite requirements make discovery horrible, search is terrible, real-time chat is miserable for discussion, and its "forum" features are just threaded chats. The vibe is way worse, it breeds and feeds drama, and the audience that survives it can correspondingly be either less appealing or require more moderation.
Bluesky doesn't solve the same problems as G+ circles, but between feeds and follow/moderation lists, it has a similar vibe of being able to focus the lens on a topic better than Twitter or Threads, and without the overhead and UX gaps of Fediverse.
This underestimates the effect of Bluesky’s culture of “block and move on”. There are curated block lists you can subscribe to. Individual communities do a pretty good job of shutting down toxicity they don’t want to engage with.
It shares the same problem that Twitter had years ago back when it supported API blocklists.
Everybody you're blocking is at the whims of the blocklist owner, and it didn't take long for those people to go insane and use their lists as a tool for their own personal unrelated crusades.
Bluesky is already starting to experience this from a few I saw going around
Being 'at the whims' of whoever maintains the blocklist isn't unique to this style of moderation - when it's Twitter, you're at the whims of the company - but at least it means you can use other blocklists if/when the good ones go to shit, or can start a community-ran blocklist.
Yes, your combined blocklist is point-in-time. If you unsubscribe from a blocklist, a user on that blocklist will be immediately unblocked, provided they're not also on another blocklist you subscribe to (and that you didn't block them directly).
if they had a rule in the autoblock subscription that if a name appears in 3 or more (configurable) subscribed moderation lists it gets autoblocked, then users could stop following bad actors and change what moderation lists they use over time with less large impact to their experience. if you see messages from someone and they're on one of your block lists, you might reconsider the list. if they're on 2 you might consider personally blocking them, and if on 3+ you'd never see them. make blocks require a reason as well that the user will see alongside their block.
On Bluesky you have different algorithms/feeds which solves this problem. You subscribe to multiple feeds, which show you different content using different moderation and block lists. Sort of like you read different news sites and watch different news channels. Whatever feed you find that you enjoy the most is the one you spend the most time on.
After I moved to Beijing, my first job was at a company opening a network of village banks. The villages had a population of around 1 million. SF has 850k people.
There's a theoretical limit of 1400 villages in the entire country at that size, and that's assuming zero population in cities. I don't see how it can be true.
If a village has 1 mil, then China is probably entirely made up of something like 40 cities and 500 villages, plus some smaller stuff.
From the perspective, I would think a city of 800k is definitely midsized if you compare with China.
I'm from Brazil, and we would definitely say 1 million people is a midsized city there (I don't live there anymore). For example, have you ever heard of Campinas? Well, it has a population of over 1.2 million people, and everyone I know around the area call it a midsized city.
But no, no one in their right mind would say a 1 million people city is a village :D.
China has over 100 cities with > 1 million population. (113 to be precise).
The 100th-ranked US city (Huntsville, AL) has a population of 225k. (The 113th, Fayetville, NC, has just under 210k.)
San Francisco, with 808k population, would rank 126th in China. Not "small rural", but definitely a 2nd or 3rd tier city at best. (The comparable Chinese city, Anqing, is a prefecture-level city in the southwest of Anhi Province, and has, to boot, 631 years on SF.)
Consider that Wuhan, a city in China you'd likely never have heard of prior to early 2020, has a population of 11 million, more than any US city, and ranks 9th overall in population within China.
The city of San Jose is spread over a huge area (a good fraction of Santa Clara Valley aka Silicon Valley). The downtown area of San Jose which you might think of as a city is rather small.
The convex hull of San Jose also encloses a ton of junk that is not San Jose because of their unincorporated enclaves and incorporated exclaves. San Jose badly fails my test of whether a city is good or bad based on the geometric complexity of their boundary.
yeah, SF is only 800k people, it is pretty small, and the sunset, richmond, parkside, excelcior, and visitation valley neighborhoods are basically single-family subrubs.
Realistically, SF is only a city in it's north-east quadrant. the rest are cute, sleepy suburbs. And I say that as someone who lives in one of those neighborhoods.
I will wager a box of donuts the like-hiding was due to some combination of politics and Musk’s embarrassment for being called out every time he liked some cringe porn-adjacent tweet.
