Thanks. That sounds sensible and doesn't contradict with what I understood.

That's the question, though. If VMWare has enough value, and more importantly enough potential to develop more value, they could have sustained the business and wouldn't have had to do layoffs. If not, then the grandparent is wrong. I guess the evidence for that would be in terms of migration rates, previous revenue growth and revenue growth by close competitors. I was hoping the great grandparent had something serious to add. giving some evidence that Broadcom is wrong.

This is, BTW, the reason that I'd always strongly push for a proper FOSS solution if reasonable. When you get backed into a corner by a vendor, others will be backed into that corner too and there will be a way to escape. Not so possible with something like vmware.

There's also the fact that resources don't scale linearly to do things faster. Slow migrations allow people to spot the cause of problems and fix them. Fast migrations lead to huge complex troubleshooting where causes are unclear. Sometimes, what's a huge project if done now just happens naturally by the needs of the development team if left for two years.

Tell us more... I mean seriously. There are plenty of us that follow a bit from the sidelines but have no real interest in the details. If you could give a brief summary with links to evidence or articles about how VMWare would have done well otherwise that'd be interesting. From the outside it seemed to me that the alternative hypervisors were just getting more than "good enough" and so VMWare's customer base was inevitably going to shrink. I've certainly had no temptation to even think about it for many years.

Just contradicting from the sidelines isn't convincing. Sure, there are plenty of cases where VMWare had some advantages, but it seemed there was no way that was enough to sustain their business. And yes, I quite likely don't know better.

New experimental system for mammals (like humans) which are controlled by electric collars that trigger when one of "thousands" of data points goes outside expected boundaries. Who did you expect to be behind this? Tom Hanks? Margot Robbie? Big bird?

Germany, whilst not as bad as some try to project, has a seriously broken transmission network with not enough connectivity between the North and the South of the country and too much reliance on links through Sweden which annoy the Swedes by pushing up their energy prices. They need to get interconnection to both Scotland (direct or through Denmark) and to Morocco for wind (via Italy and Tunisia? It would really make sense for them to have a huge set of Solar farms in the North African desert).

If Germany was as much electric as Norway, Europe's real energy problems would be mostly solved.

This appears to be a reasonable article about the subject.

Right. Now it fabricates unjustified citations to real existing medical research so that you won't manage to catch it or disprove the references. We understand progress.

Thanks for the insight. I saw a couple of very obvious April's fools messages before going to bed and then ignored the day. Now I understand the somewhat depressing reason why.

Correct. Even if they can win the case for copyright, they would lose things like triple damages for wilful infringement. All a defendant would have to do is point to a different repo with no copyright identification and say that they copied from that without realizing it was the Anthropic code. As it is, there will be no such repo, except on dark web sites so that claim will be much harder to make.

Anthropic may well have trained their agents on some of their customer's code. I guarantee you that they have never trained it on their own core source code.

Look at the rust repo. They are 100% clear that they did exactly that. Each team consisted only of one agent (an advantage, since the agent can work much faster and with AI code advantages, but still clearly a compete software team). One team (agent) saw the code and wrote a spec. A different team (second agent) saw the spec and wrote Rust code to match it.

A) the copyright restrictions on the AGPLv3 make it illegal to distribute an altered AGPLv3 so that would make it invalid. As I read it, they have only added extra stuff at the end which would be aggregation not alteration so may well be okay as long as they don't add anything the AGPLv3 doesn't permit to be added.

B) The software clearly states that it is licensed under the AGPLv3, but with permitted restrictions. In which case, the actual AGPLv3 and not any altered version is what we care about anyway.

My understanding is that this isn't an attribution problem, it's about forcing the logo to appear in the final user visible product, which is going beyond mere attribution, so I think that EuroOffice is actually mostly right and will find an appropriate solution in the end, even if they aren't right in some details.

There are, in the world, multiple people with different, sometimes even contradictory opinions between them.

It's not as simple as just that. It's a monopoly that is fearful that it might lose the monopoly if it isn't seen to be doing a good job. If you just have a monopoly, as Microsoft did in operating systems, the tendency is to exploit your customers for gain. If you have a monopoly but you think someone with the power to do so is out looking for an excuse to take it away from you then you want to avoid giving them an excuse.

This is not just paranoia. Multiple of the involved politicians have already been asked "isn't this stupid because you can use a VPN to get around it" and have answered things to the effect of "we are at least doing something and we will try to get round to blocking VPNs in future". I expect that they will come up with exceptions for corporates or UK hosted VPNs, however the current legislation proves that the mere fact of it being insane will not stop them.

I was really talking about private / personal VPNs. I'm sure there will be supposed to be some government and corporate exception. I'm sure they will also set up the corporate exception in some horrible way that makes it fail anyway.