What the hell is OpenCandy?

[Stoic Joker]

Those that do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.

-app103 (April 11, 2011, 10:10 PM)

Perhaps so, but those that fixate on history are just doomed.

They seem to be trying to get it "right", so I say give them a chance (face it desperation will only make it/them worse). Just watch them like a hawk...and if the screw-up once. A mass Exodus of support should send the needed message.

If the developer/marketing relationship can't be somehow "Self Policed", the lawyers will get their hooks in it deeper, and the internet will end up quickly sucking as bad as basic cable.

Renegades point of "people gotta eat" is (unarguably) true. And straight donations are not an effective business model (i.e. Getting one million people to send you $1 doesn't actually work). So alternatives are needed, and some may require more vigilance than others.

On a side note: You are correct in your assessment of my (lack of an extensive) criminal record. But I do know several "felons". Some are indeed "unrecoverable" ... But many were just in a bad place, at a bad time, and made a bad decision.

[40hz]

Should I be accosted at the door because of what I might do? No.

-Stoic Joker (April 11, 2011, 11:33 AM)

Yes.

The bank's security has responsibility for the safety of its customers and employees. So they have every right (and IMO obligation) to question you since youre setting foot on their property. They also have the right to bar all persons carrying weapons from entering the building, even if certain people have the legal right to carry. A gun permit only applies to your being granted the privilege (not the right - otherwise you wouldnt need a license) to have a concealed weapon when on public property. Any individual has the right to ban weapons on their own property except when they're carried by police officers when they're acting in an official capacity.

My actions are perfectly legal

Yes they are.

...But the permission you were granted is also subject to verification. Having a gun permit doesn't mean you can't be stopped or challenged. Nor does it mean you'll be permitted entry with a gun everywhere. It just means you won't be arrested by the police once it's established you're "packing."
 

------
@SJ - Note: this is how it works in CT at least. It may be different where you live.  

(Carry permit? Bank? I take it you're the guy that got stuck with making the bank deposits huh?)

[wraith808]

That's cool... but does an individual's right to choose not to consume make the company's right to exist and operate moot?  Does an opinion not based in current facts surrounding the company make the company evil?

-wraith808 (April 11, 2011, 08:51 PM)

Pardon me, but it s a known fact that I have trust issues (I don't believe in 3 strikes and you'd be lucky if you were allowed 2), so help me out here...

When does a current fact stop being current and become old news, worthy of forgetting? If they do something seriously questionable today, do we immediately forgive and forget tomorrow, if they stop, change the way they do things, apologize, make promises, etc?

Where do YOU draw the line? At what point do you say enough is enough and now I am not going to trust you until you have proven yourselves worthy of that trust? How long does it take to win that trust back? How many infractions are they allowed during that period? How serious are those infractions allowed to be? At what point do you write them off and never trust again?

-app103 (April 11, 2011, 10:10 PM)

Well, no, I didn't know that, but despite that- does a mistake made rob you of your right to make a living?  They weren't convicted of any crime- what they did was wrong, and it seems from the quote of DrApps that you posted, that they are aware of it.  One strike and you're out is very unforgiving, especially in a world where *everyone* makes mistakes.  Sure, there is a point where you don't trust... but I don't think that OC as a company is at that point.  They've made some course corrections and had some defects- even those were benign- just traces of what they had done.  A dll by itself, or registry settings by themselves are not smoking guns- and to me point to the fact that there were some growing pains more than malign intent.  An executable or anything that ran out of process, or any sort of network traffic to the contrary of what they're saying would be more evidence than these missteps.

And is there a point where there's no redemption?  I should hope not.  The lack of the possibility of redemption removes hope, and removes the one thing that can make people choose the right path.  It reminds me of people with criminal records.  Do you trust them outright and give them the keys to the safe?  No.  But if you don't give them a chance to prove themselves, then how are they ever going to be rehabilitated?  And isn't it just as much your fault when given the lack of a means to make a living they resort to the only thing they can still do?

[Stoic Joker]

@SJ - Note: this is how it works in CT at least. It may be different where you live.

-40hz (April 12, 2011, 08:04 AM)

Yeah, I'm in the south ... Our version of the "Three Step Rule" is never be more that Three Steps away from your gun...    (Seriously) The last stats I saw on the news for FL was 1 in 10 for armed license holders ... And I think half the other 9 just do it anyway.

[wraith808]

@SJ - Note: this is how it works in CT at least. It may be different where you live.

-40hz (April 12, 2011, 08:04 AM)

Yeah, I'm in the south ... Our version of the "Three Step Rule" is never be more that Three Steps away from your gun...    (Seriously) The last stats I saw on the news for FL was 1 in 10 for armed license holders ... And I think half the other 9 just do it anyway.

-Stoic Joker (April 12, 2011, 12:06 PM)

When I used to live in the south, there was a county that had a gun requirement law- you were required by law to have a gun in your house.

[J-Mac]

And is there a point where there's no redemption?  I should hope not.  The lack of the possibility of redemption removes hope, and removes the one thing that can make people choose the right path.  It reminds me of people with criminal records.  Do you trust them outright and give them the keys to the safe?  No.  But if you don't give them a chance to prove themselves, then how are they ever going to be rehabilitated?  And isn't it just as much your fault when given the lack of a means to make a living they resort to the only thing they can still do?

-wraith808 (April 12, 2011, 09:23 AM)

This comparison just don’t work for me. People with criminal records and software companies (and/or their founders) that have done serious wrong aren't in the same realm with regard to rehabilitation, second chances, etc. At least in my universe!

Jim

[40hz]

@SJ - Note: this is how it works in CT at least. It may be different where you live.

-40hz (April 12, 2011, 08:04 AM)

Yeah, I'm in the south ... Our version of the "Three Step Rule" is never be more that Three Steps away from your gun...   (Seriously) The last stats I saw on the news for FL was 1 in 10 for armed license holders ... And I think half the other 9 just do it anyway.

-Stoic Joker (April 12, 2011, 12:06 PM)

Approximate number of inmates sentenced and awaiting execution order for a capital offense ( i.e. all legal appeals other than executive clemency currently exhausted).

Florida.        400
Connecticut.   10

Actual executions since the 1976 reinstatement of capital punishment through year-end 2010:

Florida.         69
Connecticut.    1

Hmm...

Wonder if the gun ownership ratio made those statistics better...or worse.  

[wraith808]

And is there a point where there's no redemption?  I should hope not.  The lack of the possibility of redemption removes hope, and removes the one thing that can make people choose the right path.  It reminds me of people with criminal records.  Do you trust them outright and give them the keys to the safe?  No.  But if you don't give them a chance to prove themselves, then how are they ever going to be rehabilitated?  And isn't it just as much your fault when given the lack of a means to make a living they resort to the only thing they can still do?

-wraith808 (April 12, 2011, 09:23 AM)

This comparison just don’t work for me. People with criminal records and software companies (and/or their founders) that have done serious wrong aren't in the same realm with regard to rehabilitation, second chances, etc. At least in my universe!

-J-Mac (April 12, 2011, 01:39 PM)

In mine they are.  I did some things out of ignorance when I was younger professionally, so I'm apt to give second chances, as I wouldn't be where I am without one.  And I know people who've had criminal records for quite innocuous mistakes... the difference a criminal record makes in things you take for granted until you have one is pretty staggering!

[J-Mac]

In mine they are.  I did some things out of ignorance when I was younger professionally, so I'm apt to give second chances, as I wouldn't be where I am without one.  And I know people who've had criminal records for quite innocuous mistakes... the difference a criminal record makes in things you take for granted until you have one is pretty staggering!

-wraith808 (April 12, 2011, 02:57 PM)

I think you misunderstand. I have no problem with redemption for people; but that has absolutely nothing to do with software developers. My moral code allows forgiveness for people. It doesn’t work the same way for software companies. Nor for banks, investment companies, etc. See the difference? People, yes. Software companies, no.

Jim

[Stoic Joker]

Wonder if the gun ownership ratio made those statistics better...or worse.

-40hz (April 12, 2011, 02:20 PM)

Has no impact on it what so ever actually. How much coastline does CT have? We have well over 1,000 miles; over half of the drugs smuggled into the US come right through FL (remember Miami Vice? ...Yeah that's right here in FL).

[wraith808]

In mine they are.  I did some things out of ignorance when I was younger professionally, so I'm apt to give second chances, as I wouldn't be where I am without one.  And I know people who've had criminal records for quite innocuous mistakes... the difference a criminal record makes in things you take for granted until you have one is pretty staggering!

-wraith808 (April 12, 2011, 02:57 PM)

I think you misunderstand. I have no problem with redemption for people; but that has absolutely nothing to do with software developers. My moral code allows forgiveness for people. It doesn’t work the same way for software companies. Nor for banks, investment companies, etc. See the difference? People, yes. Software companies, no.

-J-Mac (April 12, 2011, 03:30 PM)

No... I don't misunderstand.  My professional mistakes were as a software developer, so it's very relevant.  I'm sure *many* software developers have made mistakes, and have regrets, just as many people in other fields do.  Does that make them ineligible to make money in their chosen profession?

The people at OC are just that... people.  Yet it's guilt by association, no matter what changes they may have made, no matter what revelations they may have gleaned.  It's easy to demonize companies while holding the company to some standard- but no matter what the legal definition is, a company is not an entity.  And even if it were, that wouldn't hold water either, as OC is not Divx; it just has some of the same people.  So it's not redemption for even Divx as a company.  We're talking about people here, truthfully, and their actions and history.

[40hz]

Wonder if the gun ownership ratio made those statistics better...or worse.

-40hz (April 12, 2011, 02:20 PM)

Has no impact on it what so ever actually. How much coastline does CT have? We have well over 1,000 miles; over half of the drugs smuggled into the US come right through FL (remember Miami Vice? ...Yeah that's right here in FL).

-Stoic Joker (April 12, 2011, 03:43 PM)

Approximately 618 miles bordering some of the most well-to-do communities in the United States. We're no strangers to the drug traffickers around here. People who want drugs can easily afford to buy them.

I wouldn't be surprised if the lion's share of what came in through FL hits the distribution network and ends up on the streets around here. We're less than 50 miles from NYC where I live, so it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to the Big Apple. My area has lots of private beaches, wooded areas, small police departments, and quiet secluded neighborhoods with neighbors who tend to mind their own business and not be overly curious about what's going on next door - as long as there's no gunfire or screams to be heard.

I understand the Feds just did yet another major roundup of dealers last week.

[Stoic Joker]

A small company is a collection of people that rise or fall based on how well they work together, and how well the result of that work is accepted by the consumer. I'm pretty sure that's where wraith is at.

Large companies (/faceless evil mega-corporations) Like Shell, Bank of America, etc. are On-the-Other-Hand, subject to a corporate think (Feed the Share Holders) mentality that transcends the people (or humanity for that matter). I'm guessing is more J-Mac's take.

IT companies tend to all try to look as big a possible - Even when they're only 1 or 2 people working out of a spare room. Which makes the line blurrier, true.  But any group of people (IMO) can sit down and decide amongst themselves that they collectively screwed-up. And then do something positive about it.

Does that help any?

---------------------------

Sorry to bail on you 40Hz, but I thought maybe we should hush on the tangent...before we bother the adults... 

[40hz]

Sorry to bail on you 40Hz, but I thought maybe we should hush on the tangent...before we bother the adults... 

-Stoic Joker (April 12, 2011, 05:39 PM)

D'accord. Was about to suggest the same. 

[skwire]

C'mon, folks, this horse has been beaten entirely too much.  Let's agree to disagree and just move on.

[J-Mac]

No... I don't misunderstand.  My professional mistakes were as a software developer, so it's very relevant.  I'm sure *many* software developers have made mistakes, and have regrets, just as many people in other fields do.  Does that make them ineligible to make money in their chosen profession?

The people at OC are just that... people.  Yet it's guilt by association, no matter what changes they may have made, no matter what revelations they may have gleaned.  It's easy to demonize companies while holding the company to some standard- but no matter what the legal definition is, a company is not an entity.  And even if it were, that wouldn't hold water either, as OC is not Divx; it just has some of the same people.  So it's not redemption for even Divx as a company.  We're talking about people here, truthfully, and their actions and history.

-wraith808 (April 12, 2011, 04:26 PM)

Nope. With your example any corporation or company is made up of people. Doesn’t get them into my definition of people. Corporations and many companies are entities totally separate from the people who make professional mistakes within them. Doesn’t count at all as far as I am concerned. Investmant companies throw money at them (Apparently they just received $3.5M from one) which they would not do if it was just people. Incorporation takes away the liability from those people, so no, that corporation does not qualify for redemption IMO.

Thank you.

Jim

[wraith808]

Nope. With your example any corporation or company is made up of people. Doesn’t get them into my definition of people. Corporations and many companies are entities totally separate from the people who make professional mistakes within them. Doesn’t count at all as far as I am concerned. Investmant companies throw money at them (Apparently they just received $3.5M from one) which they would not do if it was just people. Incorporation takes away the liability from those people, so no, that corporation does not qualify for redemption IMO.

-J-Mac (April 12, 2011, 09:25 PM)

But the lack of redemption that is being talked about in this context is for the people, not the company.  OpenCandy has people from Divx, who did a bad thing.  So by association, OpenCandy is not to be trusted.  That's referring to the people.

C'mon, folks, this horse has been beaten entirely too much.  Let's agree to disagree and just move on.

-skwire (April 12, 2011, 08:51 PM)

I'm actually enjoying the debate... it's been spirited, but not mean-spirited.  But if people want to let it drop, then... /me shrugs