So, I see this as rationalization.

The fact is, you took a leadership position, and later turned your coat for reasons that perhaps made sense to you. But they don't really make sense to anyone else. So, yes, everyone who supported you then is going to feel burned.

You also made yourself a paid voice that was often hostile to Free Software, all the way back to the SCO issue. Anyone could have told you that was bound to be a losing side and you would be forever tarred with their brush.

So nobody is going to believe you had any reason but cash, whatever rationalization you cook up after the fact. So, the bottom line is that you joined a list of people who we're never going to be able to trust or put the slightest amount of credibility in.

And ultimately it was for nothing. I've consistently tried to take the high road and it's led to a pretty good income, I would hazard a guess better than yours, not just being able to feel good about myself.

Meh, it's easy to find people with skill. With values, OTOH...

You have a point.

He was a nutbar way before that, I assure you. I had my first runs into him in the first half of the 90's. The Cathedral and the Bazaar remains his single shining moment.

I'm on my second touchscreen computer and fifth tablet. I do not like touch screen for a laptop/desktop. For a smartphone I can think of no better way than a touchscreen given the lack of input device. For a portable TV otherwise known as iPad a touchscreen is about the same as a dial on the side. For a Microsoft surface or a laptop with touch screen removing your fingers off the keyboard to touch the screen is cumbersome. I also found myself rarely detaching the keyboard.

The data points I have is that they offer about the same salaries outside the valley, so if you happen to be working in one of the remote offices you are making good money.

This is not what recent hires have told me. Do you have any (suitably anonymized) examples in mind to back up your assertion?

They kept the Ethernet port on the back also, which keeps me happy. I don't want to buy another TB-to-Ethernet adaptor!

You wouldn't believe how destructive it is when a philandering spouse wants to maintain a secret second life and uses this to guilt you into not checking up on them.

Well, you shouldn't strive for it, because it's your mate that has to strive for it. The feeling of trust is a feeling that is created by the mate's actions. You check up on them to see what they are doing, and if they are behaving in a trustworthy manner, eventually you feel trust.

One of Harley's major premises is that as a psychologist, it's easier to change behavior than feelings. The change in feelings comes after your spouse changes behavior (which sometimes comes after you yourself change behavior - for example, by starting to check up on them).

I'd be more interested in replacing the equality operator, which would accomplish the same thing.

The problem is that C usage of = goes against elementary school ingrained math usage. Any UI expert will tell you that this alone is a source of confusion. The supposed time savings of having to type := over = are bogus. You spend about 0.25s extra time typing the colon. Now let's say you've written a 100K lines of code a year. This means you spent 7 hours typing that extra character. A single nasty = bug will easily exceed the 7 hours just in terms of finding it, before we account for the cost of the security breach.

Again you are mistaken. Any UI designer will tell you that dangerous options should not be easy to activate (i.e. the three finger salute), or the double turn key for nuclear launch. Given how dangerous buffer overflow is in terms of security it shouldn't be easy to deploy code that does no bounds checking.

Your argument for stdio is non-sense. All you say applies equally to malloc. Other languages do not require loading the I/O library in the header to do the linking. If you are writing a bare bones high-level assembler as C was originally meant to be I can see why you would like to load as little as possible, but heavy footprint languages such as C++ and Java have no excuse for this cumbersome call.