openoi

Regarding the dissonance, the this all has the side "if I don't own it, I won't feel the pain of loss" to it. Survival strategy in a precarious situation.

Humans build houses with their children and grandchildren in mind. Holding to land for 100 years and longer is not that an uncommon thing.

To spell it out, places a large burden on you.

And then you get evicted after the negotiated period ends anyway.

I wonder to what extent this influences what is known as the "endowment effect" in economics. The particular chair I am sitting in and have for months, is it really a more valuable one because it helps me remember?

Now before we are quick to agree on a 'yes' -- to what extent do memories hold us back? Your teak bookcase for example reminds you of a positive accomplishment, and its loss would untether you, generally speaking not wanting to intrude. Now imagine someone who objectively should change, perhaps because your industry is dying. Too many mementos, a sign of reluctance, resistance even to change?

Yet change, wanted or not, is the one constant in our life.

I realize the article is about renting to save up (-- how's that going to work, btw? After all, someone needs to charge on top of the cost of owning). But a home of one's own like in the last century, really another cradle of identity, or mistaken materialism?

Not quite about tables, but I feel this goes into the same direction and complements: https://dev.to/winduptoy/a-javascript-free-frontend-2d3e

Open source is about transparency, which covertly tweaking the wording of a thread is not.

Yet since this issue got some more attention user "mholt" has changed the thread, now merely strongly claiming it were open source but not actually publishing or referring to the closed source portions, unable to confirm there were none and it were something innocuous like a backport from Go 1.13.

Nonetheless a use of force, him keeping the right to develop the discussion further to himself but denying the same to others.

Does Caddy run afould a LGPL? Is it about this? If you cannot bear sharing and the question "how did you solve this?", then don't claim to be an open source author.

Parts, the modified Listener, has not been open sourced. Caddy's author was quick to deflect and squash any discussion about what else is held private.

The easiest answer would have been a "sure, here's the link". Instead the thread has been locked for being off-topic, yet the original issue and the question concern the same thing.

Another reason why reproducible builds in open source are so important. The version of Caddy you can compile yourself is different from that you are offered as download. And there's nowhere a notice to be found about that intransparent move.