I feel like the most natural implementation would be something like vert.x for the jvm. They already have the mechanisms to handle async execution (via reactive extensions and futures and coroutines on top of the event bus) and serialization and distribution of data across a cluster. There are eventbus clients for many popular languages as well, so you'd be able to build your application in a mix of languages.
Yeah, you handwave some of the most visible and effective unions in the United States (SAG-AFTRA, WGA), you're also ignoring education unions, healthcare unions, and many other careers where pay is not just about seniority, but also education, certification, specialization, and other factors.
Even unions in industries with legitimately undifferentiated labor will have shift differentials built into their contracts.
> It keeps people employed, which generates other positive economic effects, like buying houses and groceries.
Let's be honest here. With that $50,000 trashcan we're paying mid-level managers $30, downstream suppliers $1, and $49,967 in stock buybacks that drive income inequality just so we can pay a factory worker $2 of that $50k. We are literally just shoveling tax dollars into the pockets of the already wealthy.
At the point at which your dogs have broken into and robbed your neighbor's house more often than they have prevented your house from being broken into; that's the point at which you can compare your dogs to the Air Marshal service.
> more often than they have prevented your house from being broken into
The whole point is that you can't tell whether that's happened with the data presented, regardless of what you compare it to, and no, once is not too many times given the actual thing we're discussing.
If the existence of Air Marshals prevented one more 9/11 type event from happening, or even a few failed attempts (which would be capitalized on by politicians to push their own agendas), then I would without reservation say they are worth it. We just haven't been presented with that data. In some cases it may not exist. Acting like the answer to that is irrelevant is not the correct way to go about it though, in my opinion.
This looks like a recruiting post, but the type of people you're pitching to are the kind of people who are quite passionate about the specifics of functionality and workflow and architectures. Are you planning on providing more information than "software tool" to help developers decide if this is something they want to help build?
We're still keeping the technology mostly under wraps. We're hoping that the strong track records of everyone on our team, as well as our amazing group of investors, will interest people in applying.
Well, a strong track record was enough to get me to toss $10 into the Light Table kickstarter, hopefully it will also be enough for you to find developers willing to dedicate a couple years of their lives.
Hear hear. The parent commenter's I-told-you-so attitude frustrates me because it completely misses the point: Google de-facto controls the web, and the W3C is essentially irrelevant. Trying to suggest that the W3C's opposition would have stopped any of this is completely naive, and only serves to shift the blame.
> DRM is the price one must pay to consume BIG MEDIA content.
It's just what big media has happened to get away with.
If they found themselves without a way for their paying customers to access their content via DRM, they'd drop the requirement on the spot, with little to no financial impact except for DRM scheme licensing fees.
While that's true at the moment, I had hoped that the web being such a big market, it would entice content producers to deploy without DRM for fear of losing market share to other content providers who do.
But with the introduction of DRM into the standard, this is no longer possible.
There are still plenty of providers who don't use DRM.
You just want the DRM users content but you want it without DRM.
So what really happened is the content producers enticed the users into DRM with their content. It's the other way around, and the consumers voted with their wallet (and clicks)
