I think the argument is that Linux as a whole doesn't progress much because new projects constantly replace old projects without actually improving the underlying issues. X11 is old and has a bunch of issues, but those issues have largely been addresses, whereas Wayland is new and neat, but has a lot of issues that won't be addressed for years to come.
>Imagine if you were Atari. You've bought the rights to Transport Tycoon Deluxe from Chris Sawyer and want to sell the game up on Steam. Then you see OpenTTD (the exact same game except better in every way) also on Steam for free. What do you do?
I'd do better due diligence next time and then write it off as having been a bad decision. It's not like they have a slam dunk or even a decent case to force OpenTTD to do anything. This is OpenTTD taking it up the rear for no real advantage other than some secret financial donations to their project.
>Atari is very kind to say you can keep distributing a fan game
How are they kind for agreeing to something they have no control over in the first place. OpenTTD doesn't use any IP that Atari has any ownership over.
Sideloading things into Steam is different than having them be a real Steam app. This totally fucks over new players. I hope those donations to OpenTTD were worth it.
What a weird bootlicking POV. Atari has no real standing to even ask for this to happen and I suspect if they hadn't agreed to donate to OpenTTD, the OpenTTD folks would be singing a different tune.
wow - bootlicking! What boot am I licking? Atari has the rights to the original TTD and they could be so, so much less friendly to the OpenTTD project under our current legal system. That system sucks - I hate it and think we should dismantle it and build a better social / legal system for IP management, but it's what we are dealing with right now and we have to make the best of it.
>and they could be so, so much less friendly to the OpenTTD project under our current legal system
Explain how? Beyond the idea that anyone can sue anyone else for anything and cause some minor trouble, what actual cause of action do you think Atari has against the OpenTTD project?
You insult me and then you turn around and ask me to do your research? Some nerve.
That said, I encourage you to look into the blizzard lawsuit against WoW server emulator makers[1] or the Nintendo lawsuit against Switch emulators[2]. Both cases where teams have built software equivalent to copyrighted products without the direct use of copyrighted assets, but who were nevertheless found to have violated some aspect of IP law. I am not a lawyer and I can't say what would have happened if Atari were to bring such a suit against the OpenTTD project, but I can say with certainty that whatever the outcome it would have disrupted the project and cost an enormous amount. The combination of the IP laws in the US and the realities of our court system mean that the underlying truth often matters less than the burdens of defending yourself against accusations. Atari certainly could be dragging the OpenTTD project through court right now - but they are not and that's good for the project and all of us who have uninterrupted access to OpenTTD.
If you're interested in having an actual discussion please bring some effort to this exchange. What is preventing Atari from dragging OpenTTD through the courts? What is an example of a project fending off a lawsuit from an owner of related IP? How did they do it and why would the OpenTTD project be in that position as opposed to a position such as the ones I've outlined?
Edit: I am genuinely interested in why you think I am a bootlicker but we can't dig into it if you won't actually talk about the particulars of this situation.
I don't see how that link supports your assertion, nor really even the supports the general idea that docx isn't open. Their main complaint seems to be that it's a big standard which makes it hard to implement. Honestly it gets to be a bit hard to take these free software groups seriously when they move the goalposts and try to redefine what common words mean. It's an open format by any reasonable definition and no amount of whining by free software advocates and scare quotes changes that.
>Because their home went up in value, should they be expected to sell the house, just to pay the taxes, and get pushed back to a rental?
Not that it's always necessarily ideal, but presumably they could sell the house and buy one in a cheaper community, that's sorta the natural flow of neighborhoods. People buy into a neighborhood and raise their families and then sell to new families after their kids move out and then they move on to smaller retirement sized homes.
You’re ignoring several decades of a person’s life. People don’t tend to downsize until they retire, when the kids might be out of the house by the time they’re 45. My mom has been in her home alone for 25 years, it’s 900sqft… what is she supposed to downsize to? It’s also nice to have a place to stay when I’m in town, and she enjoys that as well, in addition to having the grandkids over.
Also, downsizing in retirement is usually due to a failure to accumulate enough retirement savings during their working years. Leaving property taxes unchecked exacerbates that problem. That’s assuming they bought a big house to begin with.
Most people in my extended family never bought big homes. There is no downsizing, as the home is already very modest, like my mom’s place.
I also bought a modest home. If property taxes were to grow unchecked and I had to downsize… there isn’t anywhere to go, other than moving to the middle of nowhere, a trailer park, or a high crime area. My place is about the size of a single-wide trailer… how am I supposed to downsize without going to a studio apartment?
I’m kind of shocked people are trying to defend the idea of raising taxes at rates that outpace inflation. Why would anyone want this? People buy homes based on the current tax rate, because they can afford it. They can’t control if property values go up, yet you want them to be punished for it? Do you want this to happen to you if/when you buy a home?
A home is supposed to create some stability in a person’s life. Leaving property taxes unchecked erodes that stability, as the city could rug pull them at any moment.
Where I’m at, a lot of people are knocking down homes from the 1940s and building big new homes. I still have a 1940s home. The trend going on here is pushing up property values, and that’s not my fault. I don’t know what it costs to rebuild a home on existing property, but some homes a block away from me were going for $1m, almost 4x what I paid just a few years ago. I don’t know what prices will be like in 20 years, but it gives me some peace of mind knowing property taxes won’t run away on me. I’ve moved 24 times in my life… I need a break.
Exactly—and that’s the normal, healthy function of a housing market.
Prop 13 distorts that by making it financially irrational to ever move, which contributes directly to the lock-in and underutilization the article describes
reply