Pretty sure the comment you're replying to is talking about development time, not compile time. They're claiming it took months longer to develop a similar app in C, not that it took longer to compile. Even if compile times are negligible now for the reasons you state, they still have a point about it taking longer to develop an equivalent app.
That doesn't mean they are allowed to forget using the right words. "Mechanical keyboard" is a very specific term for keyboards, it means that the switches used are of the 'CherryMX' type or similar. Scissor-switches are totally different, and do not fit the 'mechanical keyboard' description at all.
No, I believe it means the programmer gets automatically paid when milestones are marked as done. They are referring to the 3.5k being paid for the job. Any revenue the app gets has nothing to do with them.
I don't think he was saying you should pay less. I think it was just an observation that people are compelled to pay now rather than put it off later, because they know the price will rise, which in turn will actually cause the price to rise for the next person. I think he was just observing that it's a smart system that both compels more people to put their money down, and slowly raises the price at the same time.
I think the argument about "hobbies" is a long term one, not one that applies to people who just got laid off. If there was no automation and everyone had to farm, nobody can pursue their "hobbies", because everyone has to work to meet their needs. At present, because of automation, less people have to farm. Because of that, people with a "hobby" of filmmaking can go make films, and other people with a "hobby" of watching films are able to spend their time (and money) watching those films. The argument is that automation eventually frees up society into doing less essential things and increases overall happiness.
Also hobbies is definitely not the right word here.
>I think the argument about "hobbies" is a long term one, not one that applies to people who just got laid off.
I think that's the reality, but I am not sure that people like White from the article really acknowledge this. That is, he trivializes it by kind of offhandedly suggesting that it is good for people to have these new options open up as a result of losing their jobs.
But, in fact, what is required is a radical restructuring of our economy and society at large (including our ideas about work) in order to arrive at what he suggests. This is not a point that can simply be glossed over or assumed if he is being earnest or even remotely serious about addressing the automation issue.
Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO5sxLapAts. Step one is the automation of workers. Step three is this perfect utopian society, wherein we all just pursue our "hobbies".
Not really. Employment is a trade of resources like any other. According to what you say, the employee is "exploiting" the employer as well, because he is trading his time and effort (which he values less) for money (which he values more). The trade works because both sides have opposite notions of value in the two things (time/effort vs wages).
Besides, the value an employee generates does not come from the employee himself (if it did, he could do the same task outside of a company and earn money). His effort is channeled through several other resources, including the efforts of other employees, capital and machinery, all of which was acquired and managed by the company. The company profits because the overall value generated by this system is larger than the sum of the value generated by any individual part. This isn't exploitation "by definition".
I think the video needs to be clear what the difference in the service is. It's not that you can't send a dropbox link till it's ready (you can, the recipient just can't see it yet). The feature here is that Minbox sends the email when the file is ready, on its own. Which is awesome, but not what the video is showing. That bit is the last feature listed on the page.
Well at the end of the day, somebody still has to pay you if your business is to continue running. So unless it's an ad-based business, you're gonna have to figure out how to monetise. It could be targeted at university departments instead, for instance, who you would convince to buy a license for their cash-strapped students. Point is, your marketing would have to be geared to that particular case. If you optimized to get non-paying students, you won't make money.
