Is there even any development happening on Winamp? What would these unpaid workers do? If they can't touch the code, not even test it, then the only thing this repo could serve is reporting bugs, but will anyone fix them?
I feel like this whole release is just a PR stunt to remind us that winamp still exists. They don't actually want any help, nor do they want to give anything to the community. They just want to get into gossip, so the spectacular chaos with releasing certificates and 3rd-party proprietary code actually helps for publicity.
They dumped the prior dev team over a year ago (the ones that added the nft plug-in & fanzone crap) & it is mostly a ploy to get a free dev team as was speculated when the whole "source available" thing got announced 4 months ago (but they seem to have left it to the night before to do anything hence the complete mess that's been going on).
The license was always going to be restrictive & focused on what only benefits them as they would never want any clones, etc to be able to make use of it. Also the terms when I look at it from an ex plug-in dev stance seem to prevent any new / updated plug-ins from being built with the plug-in api headers which afaict would fall under their license & surplanting the prior one (no idea if they've changed the in-file stuff or not as I cannot look at their code to avoid issues with work my own player).
On the other hand, stats supporting the idea that working from office increases productivity are dubious at best, I've seen one which said 10% better productivity, but that could be offset by the lower costs of remote work. Maybe you can provide some research that convinced you otherwise?
These two statements cannot be both true at the same time 🠉 🠋
> Once a month, we billed for our work and submitted an updated estimated per badge final cost - committing as costs built to discount our work as necessary in order to hit DEFCON’s per unit cost targets.
This is unfortunate however it is common. DEFCON still had the right to terminate and try to salvage what they did by sending their own team. EE got in over their head.
Contractual terms and timeline should have been better. Starting this in January was probably too late. Badge issues have been common in past years.
It is quite common for a big entity to act shitty towards smaller makers. So *if* this is the case, DEFCON are the bad guys, no matter how common it is.
So how do you deal with the claim that they were sending regular cost updates and estimations throughout the development? (assuming they really did that). Shouldn't DEFCON stop it as soon as they realized some miscommunication about the price?
DEFCON isn't the entity doing the work. It's up to EE to get DC's clear agreement on changes of terms. Otherwise, EE must either:
a) acknowledge that they can't fulfill the contract under the existing terms, and follow the contract's termination procedures
b) keep working to try to complete the project, because the agreed upon payment is better, even considering the extra work, than whatever contract termination involved
When DC told EE to stop work, they did so rather than say "everything's fine, we're continuing as agreed"? That means they knew they couldn't deliver as contracted, or didn't want to because every day they kept working would lose them more money even if they fulfilled the contract.
This is why they should've had a reasonable contract that didn't require heroics in order to break even. Because, when things started to go bad, they needed a fallback besides taking a big loss for partial work, and taking a bigger loss for complete work.
Or alternatively, they could've reasonably contracted to do something nearly impossible, if they were okay with failing and getting nothing, at least for the r&d portion, turning it into an RP2350 learning opportunity. (Presumably, if they made it to production, the contract easily covered production costs.)
We can only take that at face value because we don’t know what contractual communication mechanisms were in place to handle these scenarios. It could EE revising history here. We simply don’t know
"""
Bioplastics already exist, but the name is misleading says Blennow. While today's bioplastics are made of bio-derived materials, only a limited part of them is actually degradable, and only under special conditions in industrial composting plants.
I don't find the name suitable because the most common types of bioplastics don't break down that easily if tossed into nature. The process can take many years and some of it continues to pollute as microplastic. Specialized facilities are needed to break down bioplastics. And even then, a very limited part of them can be recycled, with the rest ending up as waste," says the researcher.
"""
"Bioplastics" and "Biodegradable plastics" are two different things. One is made from bio origin, second is supposed to be degraded by bio processes. This quote actually sounds like someone was being intentionally misleading.
I feel like this whole release is just a PR stunt to remind us that winamp still exists. They don't actually want any help, nor do they want to give anything to the community. They just want to get into gossip, so the spectacular chaos with releasing certificates and 3rd-party proprietary code actually helps for publicity.