menato

One example I'm aware of is JetBrains. For years, they seemed to have a near-monopoly, but now they're in trouble.

https://ghuntley.com/kodak/ — there's no inside information here, but the article is spot on.

That’s true, but I don’t think it’s the whole story.

In my experience, another major factor is Sergey Dmitriev’s (the sole owner of the company) management style. He keeps a tight grip on major decisions, with a fairly “my way or the highway” approach. That favors managers who are comfortable with the arrangement and can drive away people who want more autonomy or a say in the company’s direction.

For years, when JetBrains faced relatively little competition, that structure worked well enough. As the market changed, though, it became harder for the company to adapt.

All these small details will be forgotten in less than a year. But association "Navier-Stokes -- OpenAI" will be part of the history. In my opinion, they are thinking about long term PR here.

It is not exactly about programming language, but rather about architecture. It is the legacy of old constructions which requires refactoring.

This is not an excuse for China's violation of natural human rights. I'm just putting some attention to idea that Tibet is probably not the most terrified-by-China territory, rather the other way round.

The idea of putting "Tibet" and "human rights" close to each other doesn't look very promising to me based on some historic observations of pre-China Tibet lifestyle http://masterok.livejournal.com/1713489.html (sorry for russian, but hopefully it is pretty simple for automatic translation)

This statement makes sense for some specific ethic systems.

For instance, in almost all modern states there are ideas, which are shared by some majorities and considered unethical in Christian ethic system.

But bad_user seems to imply ethic system which is based on the aggregate citizens vision. With such ethic system opinions of majorities are ethical by tautology.

> Even if the majority wants to suppress minority dissent (or do worse things to minorities), it's not the right thing to do.

Let me follow your definition, say, in the case of Ancient Rome. There is a minority of masters and a majority of slaves. Minority of masters has a dissent (from the slave's point of view, of course) that slaves should stay slaves. So, according to you, it is wrong for them to fight for their freedom, right?

Just for comparison: alternative photo set of same Kiev in the same time: http://tema.livejournal.com/1589937.html

Photography is a great thing: with a proper selection one could change opinion of viewer pretty strong.

Khodorkovsky was prosecuted partly for his ambitions to move to politics.

There is some rather interesting interview with Vladimir (in russian), which shows a little of his underlying motivation:

http://baaltii1.livejournal.com/198675.html

http://baaltii1.livejournal.com/200269.html

Not exactly :) If we suppose that entire economy (which is nearly 70,000,000$M) is expressed in bitcoins (there will be 20M of it), then each bitcoin would cost 3.5$M. Started from order of 4e-2, it is now traded around 4e2, so it have done half-way (in logarithmic scale) to 4e6 -- its potential limit value.

In Russia it's quite opposite: btc-e.com provides a number of convenient ways to withdraw fiat money.

I would like to add an instructive story of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignalina_Nuclear_Power_Plant there. It shows how new and profitable nuclear power plant was turned into a money-consuming hole by the political efforts of EU leaders. This story adds some additional point of view on the problems of Baltic states.

Appreciation of reality in Russia is seriously depend on who you are. If you feel bad inside, it rather caused by your own personality.

It's counterintuitive, but now Russia is drifting away from its soviet past. Meanwhile western leaders start to understand that there is a good strategy with uniform democracy: play with envy (all this stuff "reach people should pay more, in order to keep compensation for unemployed, etc"). In some sense, this is motion towards socialism.

It is highly doubtful that goverments could plan a century ahead.

I meant you could be sued for public racial statements (corresp. gay propaganda). But you could talk about admissibility of such a statements.

These people didn't negotiate this meeting. This is the formal reason.

Informal reason is that they are often organized by the institutions which funded by other countries, institutions, which aim is definitely not a prohibition of Russia.

May be it is a good idea to avoid judgements about countries/cultures, which you don't understand?

This is how law based states work, do you love it or not.

I think appropriate analogy is anti-segragation laws in US.

Well, it could be so de jure in USA. But de facto we see opposite. Snowden mentioned unconstitutional violation of human rights of US citizen. And now he is hunted by US government, seriously hunted.

Russia is way more open in this perspective.

It doesn't make any sense. Gay propaganda is considered to be a crime and it is normal to restrict this crime. Meanwhile one could discuss is it correct to consider such a thing as a crime or not.

In what sense there is no freedom of speech in Russia?

Well, stereotypical appreciation of reality is the best cure against sudden amusement.

It's not exactly about parsing JS output: JS output is something which is dedicated for user of webpage.

Ilands interface of site is something dedicated to search engine from the origin and helps to create a new layer between search engine and site.

It looks like Yandex intentions is similar to what JavaScript did to browsers.

Initially browsers could just ask for a static content. Later some interactivity was added and sites changed from beeing a [content] entity to a [content, on-action] entity.

Here we also have: initially sites were static for search engine, but now there is an interactivity support, which should split monolith entity of site.