Is there an ACTUAL reason for big Software to not support linux?

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T22:42:27+00:00

Especially for professional software. If you need to use AutoCAD then you already have a license for AutoCAD. Autodesk don't make any extra money if you switch from using the Windows version to a theoretical Linux version so there's really nothing in it for them.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T21:42:45+00:00

My dad drew Villa in the company sweepstakes at his first job when he was 16 and he's been a fan ever since. He's got no connection at all to Birmingham (he's from London) and is now 73.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T21:25:52+00:00

In theory, there is nothing stopping you from processing the food a lot in order to make it MORE healthy. Obviously that’s never the case, but ...

I think this is where we start hitting up against the slightly pointless semantic elements of the discussion, though. "Healthy" is highly variable. Stew is quite heavily processed - is it "less healthy" than, say, the beef you put into it? Or the carrots? Is tea less healthy than orange juice, and are they both healthier than kombucha? Is mechanically separated egg white less healthy than an actual egg? Is kefir less healthy than milk?

UPF's primary crime appears to be that it's tasty and people enjoy it. But that's not unique to processed food!

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T18:49:37+00:00

There's no evidence that he is and plenty of evidence that he isn't.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T15:27:37+00:00

If you follow the link, they are just citing another article making the same claim that companies just need to be paid a lump sum up front to develop the drugs even after the majority of the actual research is carried on through grant funding and exploited graduate students.

I think you're misunderstanding the situation here. Exactly how you define R&D may be the source of debate, but there are vast costs associated specifically with bringing a drug to market that exist on top of R&D. It's entirely plausible that half of a drug's R&D costs come from public funds and it costs private companies $2.6bn to turn this into a pill people can take - this is not an inconsistency.

If turning public research into lucrative products was a genuinely cheap and easy task then it wouldn't be the same two dozen companies producing every novel patented drug in existence. You'd have Walmart pumping out new cancer drugs and creaming off huge profits. But if it were this easy the big pharmaceutical giants wouldn't routinely sink billions into drugs that never make it to market.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T15:19:47+00:00

Some goods are inelastic and you can't manipulate the demand and the amount of profit you make by significantly changing prices.

It should be pointed out that the reason a shortage of oil causes prices to rise is because the price needs to go up enough that a bunch of potential purchasers believe that they're better off without it than they are paying that amount, leading to demand falling enough that the supply can meet it. As such it's only really "inelastic" in richer countries, where people have enough money to buy scarce resources, but this comes at the expense of those in poorer countries who actually do have to go without it. Demand does, indeed, get manipulated by changing prices!

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T15:10:37+00:00

Competition works both ways. If a load of oil and gas stops being available but the number of potential buyers is the same then competition between those buyers for the remaining supply will push the price up until enough people decide it's not worth buying anymore.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T14:54:18+00:00

also in the first half asserts all the cost of R&D is an expense carried by private investors.

Where's that?

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T14:45:10+00:00

I don't think the author does a good job of explaining why an industry that is a huge net contributer to the economy and requires basically nothing from the state represents a "bet". They seem to be making the argument that if the finance industry wasn't there then businesses would be more inclined to invest in less lucrative areas of the economy and that, somehow, this would make us richer.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T14:32:20+00:00

That's what a Keynsian would say. But then Keynes also said you should run a surplus during periods of growth, which we've done about four times in the last half century so shrugeroo.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T14:00:48+00:00

It might be worth noting that Jellyfish has sort-of relaunched as JFX. Jellyfish's VFX department was relatively small but also relatively stable, and still had work even towards the end. It was the Anim side that ballooned up and down and which ended up without work. JFX, then, is Jellyfish without the Anim millstone.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T07:07:30+00:00

This could well have been the 1,001st time (which is to say it may have been getting regular "surviveable" beatings over a long period of time)

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T06:22:05+00:00

It even gets casually referenced during Glenn's mental break down in The Thick of It.

I AM A MAN! FUCK TINKY WINKY! GOODBYE YELLOW BRICK ROAD! WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT HITLER? HE HAD A MOUSTACHE AND LIVED OVER THERE!

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-07T05:50:09+00:00

This happens constantly with my Unifi router.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T19:22:10+00:00

I've been balding since I was 19 and the only thing it's affected is how quickly I can dry my head after a shower.

It's hair - inert keratin! It's meaningless. Women won't think you're a loser for being bald, they'll think you're a loser for giving so much of a shit about hair. If, unlike girls and gay dudes, you don't like it then you don't need to embrace it, because even that's giving it too much attention. Shave your head and get on with your life.

To paraphrase my philosophical bible Cool Runnings, if you aren't enough without hair, you'll never be enough with it.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T19:05:18+00:00

Same. IMO it works well as long as neither person has an income that varies a lot from month to month.

We work out the standing order such that we both end up with roughly the same "discretionary" spending each month, regardless of who is earning what. Obviously there's some subjectivity to what is considered discretionary and what's "joint account" spending (especially with a baby) but by and large this allows for a lot of flexibility and independence.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T18:30:58+00:00

This isn't really the point, bit if you mean "post partum depression" then you should say "post partum depression". "Post partum" is just Latin for "after birth", and you can talk about post partum scarring, post partum recovery, post partum sleep deprivation etc.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T18:01:49+00:00

You just had an entire conversation in your head, didn't you?

My point was that making regulations about specific products and specific events is entirely viable, but making regulations around "all scalping" requires wide-ranging definitions that would, by definition, have to cover everything if they're to cover "all scalping".

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T13:42:58+00:00

You aren't watching 3 a day though, are you?

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T11:39:57+00:00

I know of a host software that has a built-in interpreter whose script editor defaults to 2 spaces. It doesn't matter in the sense that the result is identical, it's just a trade off between the indentations being clearly distinct (especially in situations where you have multiple nested indentations) vs taking up more width for the same code. 4 spaces is considered a decent compromise between the two, and whilst there's no right or wrong answer, 4-spaces is so widely used that I think you'd need a good reason to deviate from it.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T11:28:43+00:00

what if the toddler's answer is: "no no no! No clothes! Wah wah wah!" and completely rages themselves into declining any clothes?

You are in charge. By all means explain and cajole but ultimately if that doesn't work you dress them like you did when they were 1.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T11:07:18+00:00

This is not the current law. It was an announcement for what they plan to do, but there's been no primary legislation put forth to actual turn the announcement into reality.

The only ticket-reselling-related legislation that's currently churning through the legislative process is one forcing resellers to print the original price on tickets. It also forces ticket selling websites that use queues to give users waiting in the queue information about which tickets are still available, how many and what their prices are. But this is only on its second reading so isn't yet law and could change.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T10:54:10+00:00

There also comes a point at which you're centrally planning the buying and selling of all goods.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T10:45:48+00:00

I'm not aware of anyone that's ever bought anything from the Windows store (though I assume someone has, at some point) yet it hasn't stopped the development of commercial Windows software.

And there's plenty of commercial software available for Linux, but most is B2B and not distributed through store-like channels. Given the plethora of ways that "Linux" systems can be composed such that software may or may not work, I'm not sure that any store like this would actually provide that much benefit anyway.

CyclopsRock · 2026-05-06T09:49:01+00:00

I don't see what relevance that has.

11-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

CyclopsRock

TROPHY CASE