FB is far from the only big tech company which has sponsored OSM as a competitor to Google Maps (Microsoft/Facebook/DigitalGlobe/Telenav/FourSquare/Craigslist have all sponsored OSM to some degree; Apple, of course, went its own way and created Apple Maps).
It's a reaction to Google Maps: a monopoly on high-quality up-to-date global maps with business location is dangerous to everyone else, as a chokepoint on mobile applications. It's less about 'acquiring data' and more about not being extorted by GM. Classic 'commoditize your complement' dynamics: https://www.gwern.net/Complement
Apple Maps is based on OpenStreetMap, and they use OSM in many countries. I believe they use OSM for turn-by-turn routing in Denmark (or was it Netherlands) (source: Apple gave a talk at the OSM conference (SotM) in 2018, but required it not be recorded).
Their motivation is self-serving but I don't think it's so nefarious. They use OpenStreetMap in check-in posts to display map data around locations that Facebook users have visited, so improving OpenStreetMap in turn improves the quality of this feature.
Firefox has this built-in, no? You can quick-switch to tabs by using sigils in the AwesomeBar, and you can click the drop-down button in the tab bar to get a list of open tabs.
I've been through an acquisition in the past where the purchasing company told us that we'd remain independent and that "we like what you're doing, that's why we purchased the company, we don't want to change anything". This was true for roughly 6 months, then sweeping business and cultural changes happened.
Do you have any assurances that what you've been told, regarding independence will remain true? If so, are those assurances any more concrete than the initial promise of independence?
Not trying to be negative, but telling a company that's been acquired that things will stay the same, seems to be one of the oldest corporate lies in the book.
There are no guarantees in life and I'm in technology because I like change...but when the announcement came across my email in October I was nervous for some of the same reasons.
But I always put more trust in my own interactions and I've had an opportunity now to work with quite a few of my new colleagues in IBM on both the engineering and business side. What I have seen from them is humility and curiosity about our business - there has been no arrogance. This has been true of their words and their actions so far. To me this is important because I think it's as a result of arrogance on the part of the acquirer that many deals go bad post-close.
Hope springs eternal in the hearts of men. Here's the thing: We have a LOT of evidence that those corporate promises mean nothing. There is a vast history inside and out of IBM of exactly this pattern of everyone saying nothing will change and then everything changes.
What you are saying to us is that the only reason you think nothing will change is that you really, really believe the IBM people. (Just like Palmer Luckey:https://thenextweb.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2014/03/...) But that's even less than what other companies have been able to offer skeptics. But we know
"Seventy percent of U.S. acquisitions in the United States negatively impact the acquiring company’s results, sometimes immediately, and often continuing many years after purchase. Approximately 40 percent of the acquisitions of the last 10 years brought devastating business results. In about 80 percent of such cases, product or service, market share, and cultural impact are far below the goals anticipated in the beginning."
https://media.terry.uga.edu/socrates/publications/2011/07/bi...
YOU might be convinced, but you haven't given anyone a reason to believe it.
From my experience the only real proof that will convince people comes from the actions that are taken from now forward. I'd ask that if you believe these actions are harmful to developers or open source communities let me know @bradmicklea on Twitter.
Public statements are garbage and just sales pitches to reassure investors.
Unless Red Hat's deal legally mandated things stay a certain way in actual words written in a contract, then it's literally nothing and IBM can gut the place tomorrow if they wanted to.
This happens all the time with acquisitions. Most notable is TravisCI firing what, most of their senior staff 6 months after acquisition?
Proof will come in the actions that follow. If you see changes in how Red Hat behaves in the community feel free to let me know - @bradmicklea on Twitter.
Seems like politicians just trying to win public favor by taking broad swings at a hot topic, rather than trying something that would actually protect the youth, or anyone for that matter.
How has history not convinced these people that prohibition is ineffective and a waste of public funds?
Here is the link to the proposed ballot measure, which was somehow not linked to by ANY of the sources covering this story.
https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/LI031919.pdf
Looks to be two separate measures, one banning all nicotine products from being sold, manufactured, or distributed from City property, the 2nd banning all Non-FDA approved products (vapes) from the entire city: 190311 & 190312, respectively.
Nice, thanks! Yeah, it's ridiculous that news sites seem to be deathly averse to actually linking to sources; if they took a cue from Wikipedia maybe they'd be less vulnerable to "fake news" accusations...
I agree, we can't blame people with limited economic opportunities for taking a relatively 'good paying' job. We can absolutely blame one of the largest corporations in the country for offering jobs with such demanding and damaging work while offering few support services and allowing these sub-contacting companies to treat employees in such a manner.
