For your point about Anheuser-Busch, I'm not familiar enough with all that went down, so hopefully you can clarify if I'm wrong. Since the company was bought out (vs going out of business), doesn't that mean the Anheuser-Busch family (which I'm presuming had a large number of shares) would still have their wealth?

Anheuser-Busch is a very interesting case, I would refer you to Julie Macintosh's book "Dethroning the King", or one of her excellent presentations.[1]

The Wikipedia page on Augustus Busch IV states the following:

>"Press reports indicated that the Busch family ownership of the company had greatly dwindled over the years with Busch's father owning only 1.2 percent of the shares at the time of the takeover. In total the Busch family owned only 4 percent of the company"[2]

I think it is fair to say the the Busch family were able to preserve some of their wealth, but their status has declined drastically over time, and will likely continue to do so. I must admit that the story about this family is subjective, and anecdotal.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXq9Jj4LGCo

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Busch_IV

Lovely to see venturebeat sowing more confusion around sensible usage of the word 'hacking'.

I'm assuming there was at least some scm in place before, but my few google searches haven't turned up what it was. Do you know?

*edit: Didn't look hard enough, according to this: http://git-scm.com/book/en/Getting-Started-A-Short-History-o... it was just files and patches from 1991-2002. Seems crazy from a modern perspective...

Yeah, check this out from 1998 (two years before OP) https://lkml.org/lkml/1998/9/30/122

Wait is this where the original idea for git came from?

Larry McVoy was the BitKeeper guy. This was early in terms of distributed version control, but I have no idea if it was the first or just (for a while) the most popular. Linus wrote git using several lessons he learned from using BitKeeper. It's not just a copy, though.

As a general rule across the web, I'd agree with you. Although, I feel like on StackExcahge (or at least SO) those with the highest scores typically gave good answers in their domain as judged by their community and would not commonly give any answers outside their domain that could be voted up simply based on user rep alone.

I don't really have any hard data on this, it's opinion based on seeing extremely good answers from high rep people regularly, and not being able to recall seeing poor answers from high rep users voted highly when they aren't actually useful.

If Segways are still being sold [0], doesn't that mean the market is big enough to sustain the product?

0: https://store.segway.com

Yeah, seems like they should maybe institute some type of manual review for any type of "global" permissions. It would impede the well-behaving apps that legitimately need global permissions, but it might be worth it.

... or incentive them not to request universe permissions.

I like how the latest revision is a cleanup edit that introduces another typo.

its probably an attempt at a "reddit roll"