Was this a deal breaker for any company?
I ask because the Docker Desktop paid license requirement is quite reasonable. If you have less than 250 employees and make less than $10 million in annual revenue it's free.
If you have a dev team of 10 people and are extremely profitable to where you need licenses you'd end up paying $9 a year per developer for the license. So $90 / year for everyone, but if you have US developers your all-in payroll is probably going to be over $200,000 per developer or roughly $2 million dollars. In that context $90 is practically nothing. A single lunch for the dev team could cost almost double that.
To me that is a bargain, you're getting an officially supported tool that "just works" on all operating systems.
But they didn't anticipate that people are not using BTC to buy pizza and a million other things, the great bulk of BTC is being stashed in financial vehicles like ETFs, generating fewer and fewer transactions.
Seems like a doom cycle. Fewer transactions, less profit, fewer miners, slower transactions, less value.....
To get it out of the way, I do not agree that it should've taken a journalist to get involved to have this situation solved.
However, I'd like to prompt Hacker News with how would you handle receiving support requests from a product that has >2.7B users. Almost all of which are non-directly revenue generating, across hundreds of different languages, in every conceivable location in the world.
It's an extremely hard problem to solve, but I don't think anyone has got it right. I'll be playing devil's advocate in the comments. Keep me busy for my flights.
Someone responded with a long post showing scenarios with each, looked superficially authoritative... but on closer inspection, the tax treatment was wrong, the numbers were wrong, and it was comparing a gain from stocks held for 20 years with ETFs held for 8 years. When someone pointed out that they'd written a page of bullshit, the poster replied that they'd asked ChatGPT, and then started going on about how it was the future.
It's totally baffling to me that people are willing to see a question that they don't know the answer to, and then post a bunch of machine-generated rubbish as a reply. This all feels terribly dangerous; whatever about on forums like this, where there's at least some scepticism, a lot of laypeople are treating the output from these things as if it is correct.
AFAIK, currently, Netflix only uses FreeBSD for their CDN appliances; their user facing frontend and apis live (or lived) in AWS on Linux. I don't know what they were running on before they moved to the cloud.
I don't think they started doing streaming video until 2007 and they didn't start deploying CDN nodes until 2011 [1]. They started off with commercial CDNs for video distribution. I don't know what the linux vendor marketplace looked like in 2007-2011, but I'm sure it wasn't as niche as in 1997 when Netflix was founded. I think they may have been using Linux for production at the time that they decided to use FreeBSD for CDN appliances.
> Hiring foss devs and putting them under NDA for everything they write that doesn't get upstreamed is an excellent way to get nearly everything upstreamed aswell, and the cost of competitors then porting these merged upstream changes back down into their linux is not nothing, so this gives a competitive moat advantage.
I don't think Netflix is particularly interested in a software moat; or they wouldn't be public about what they do and how, and they wouldn't spend so much time upstreaming their code into FreeBSD. There's an argument to be made that upstreaming reduces their total effort, but that's less true the less often you merge. Apple almost never merges in upstream changes from FreeBSD back into mac os; so not bothering to upstream their changes saves them a lot of collaborative work at the cost of making an every 10 years process a little bit longer.
At WhatsApp, I don't think we ever had more than 10 active patches to FreeBSD, and they were almost all tiny; it wasn't a lot of effort to port those forward when we needed to, and certainly less effort than sending and following up on getting changes upstream. We did get a few things upstreamed though (nothing terribly significant IMHO; I can remember some networking things like fixing a syncookie bug that got accidentally introduced and tweaking the response for icmp needs frag to not respond when the requested mtu was at or bigger than the current value; nothing groundbreaking like async sendfile or kTLS).
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20121021050251/https://signup.ne...
Looking at macOS 26, it's hard not to compare it visually to Vista given the transparency emphasis. Hopefully in a few years an Alan Dye-free Apple will move in a different direction.