There's a reason all the major devs have moved from Perforce / SVN / etc to Git...and that's because they were all fucking awful.

So yes, history would have been different. Git is still a bit bad, but nowhere as bad as all the failed SCS from the old days.

Jesus, it's amazing that guy even considered himself a programmer. He was an amazing businessman, in the way that any well funded sociopath in the right time period is...but was he ever really a "programmer"?

I know there is a lot of contention over what he might have written, versus what he bought / stole.

In the end though, the victors write the history books...or auto-biographies.

This is why I licence my code as BSD. I want people / companies / E-Corp / whatever to be able to take it and make it their own. Mix it up, re-work it, and not worry that I am going to bitch-slap them 10 years later, when they have a profitable product, and demand money from them.

My work is pretty specific, it's for a single game engine, and a pretty focused type of game. What I want is for more people to come together, benefit from my work, re-mix it, share it, and then perhaps...maybe...some of that to bounce back to me and help me make my stuff more awesome.

I don't give a fuck how rich you get using my work, I only hope that I can make a decent living off it one day.

Creating a viable eco-system of people who use the same code as I do, increases the chances I don't have to write a particular piece of code, and we *all* benefit.

I can't believe I forgot to mention Motown.

I think you forgot the following two decades. The 70's gave us disco, and then the 80's gave us rap / hip hop *and* electronica - think Kraftwerk, Numan, Yello, etc.

Each represents a big enough change from the previous generations and forms to fulfil your criteria. Certainly bigger than white guys stealing black guy's music and playing it with electric guitars.

I'll second this. It can play back 4k content in HEVC, making it pretty future proof too.

It looks more like it should be pronounced Cux (cucks).

Is that you, clean coal?

It didn't come without some fight. I made it completely clear in the interview I would not do death marches. I assured them if they needed overtime for a short period to hit a serious deadline I would do that, but I wouldn't death march for weeks on end to fix bad estimates or project management. I wouldn't do it to my team either. There was some friction with middle management, but some things are worth fighting over.

When I moved companies, they accepted that, and as a reward had their most productive and profitable years ever while I was at the helm of their development team.

Now, my examples are small to medium sized companies, working for very large financial companies. YMMV.

The issue here is trying to sell a product you are not actually capable of building. Your company sold them x amount of work over y time, when they only had x/z amount of people to do that work in y time.

It's like a factory capable of making 2000 widgets / hour taking on a contract for 6000 widgets / hour.

Management and the development team need to work hand in glove to be sure they are capable of what the sales team is selling. At those jobs I had enough sway and close enough relationships to both management and sales to ensure we were covered.

If you over-sell your ability to produce, you better hope like hell you can recruit either some good permanents, or fill up the gaps with competent contractors (often a better choice) to make any deadlines you promise.

Again, I am going to state, if you are on a death march lasting five years, or even five weeks - that's not a death march - it's just business as usual for that company. Even if they hired enough people to cover that project, they would have oversold more work and left you all death marching to the next deadline.

Don't work for companies like that. It's not worth your health, or the massive loss of income you incur, because you're working 60-80 hours for a 40 hour wage.

That sounds like total incompetence from the people responsible for managing the project. Either your deadlines were ridiculous to begin with, you didn't re-negotiate smarter deadlines and more money from the client like you should have, or your company wants to work you to death then quickly replace you with another zombie.

Any death march that lasts more than a few weeks is a red flag you are working at a terrible company and need to switch jobs.

The rest few years I worked, not one single product I was responsible for required a death march. We shipped everything on time and to spec to the client. My team were happy, productive, and motivated because of this. They had a good solid work / leisure balance. People would happily stay late for a few nights if we had some things that needed doing outside business hours - even a few weekends, for the same reason. They were always rewarded with time off or a bonus for going above and beyond their job description.

Since we have the word "regression" no, I am not implying that. I am stating that when reviewed there is a decent chance of errors being found and that code will tend towards less errors in the absence of new features. It's unreasonable to expect that code refactors will never add new bugs, but it is perfectly reasonable to assume that they will trend towards less bugs.

I am volunteering to find the ones in the code I have written and open sourced. Is that good enough for you?

You've forgotten about the existence of iteration. Your assumption is they only have one chance ever to write a piece of code, and that it is never reviewed by another coder, or even the original coder after it's been written. You assume the code is never refactored, or passed through static check tools or other forms of analysis.

I habitually shift-delete things because it saves a lot of time moving large folders with massive numbers of files into the recycle bin. I have been caught out by this once or twice over the years, but always had a recent backup and so have never lost anything that way.