I've changed my mind and I'd like to disagree with my previous statement. You can't pay people to care.
Very good point. I worked for an employee owned company and I hated the work, but loved the atmosphere. There really was this sense of everyone there working together to make everyone better. I don't think stock options can provide the same atmosphere, the employees need to have agency around leadership choices as well as the compensation that comes with it.
I disagree, I think if you provide ownership of the company as part of compensation you can pay people to care. No big companies do this, but I think they could!
Okay, then what is the process for creating good policy?
Yes, stop exercising.
Littlefinger embodied as a political party.
If this is true, that is astonishing.
If the Ottoman Empire wasn't the middle East, what was it?
Holy shit! Me too, except I've decided I like it. It is a compelling story. It goes a bit hard on the scientific accuracy which can kind of interrupt the flow, though.
I find the most interesting part is the insight of modern Chinese commentary of recent Chinese history. I wasn't sure what popular sentiment was, or what criticism / critiques would be allowed to be published by the party.
That doesn't really have the same rigidity. There would be no guarantee for others that it would remain available to them as long as they adhere to those principles.
Said another way, a bad faith actor could create a patent and make it available to FOS developers, but then turn around and sell that patent to someone who will charge those same developers.
I suppose you could have a third legally binding document that stipulates the terms of use, but kinda wish it was just handled under the patent.
Might be a stupid question, but I'd there a GNU license equivalent to patents? Could you patent something that could be used for free, but not used by a company in a for-profit matter?
What kind of feeder is this?