That's not an uncomfortable question at all. SWE (and all employees) should be paid to the point that the owners of their company, while well-rewarded, are not sucking up a large percentage of global wealth personally...and that's the less adventurous answer.
... right, because people start companies out of their philanthropic desires.
It is funny here how all the people are pro-union don't start their own companies to compete with the ones that exploit people and offer employees all the perks they ever dreamed of.
What's needed to form a contract is an offer, acceptance, and consideration - if an offer was made and accepted and something of value was exchanged, and there wasn't confusion about the terms (after 10 years, there wouldn't be), that's good enough for a contract to have legal force.
granting API access in excess of the free tier would most likely constitute something of value, but yeah - probably wouldn't bother, it would be expensive to pursue and not worth it.
Officially, yes, something of value. In practice, just something.
> To my mind the acquiring and delivering of the [used chocolate bar] wrappers was
certainly part of the consideration in these cases, and I see no good reason
for drawing a distinction between these and other cases. — Lord Reid
> It is said that when received the wrappers are of no
value to Nestlé’s. This I would have thought irrelevant. A contracting
party can stipulate for what consideration he chooses. A peppercorn does
not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee
does not like pepper and will throw away the corn. — Lord Somervell of Harrow
Going from FB to $REDACTED to Oculus was a pretty wild ride, there were a lot of different cultures, though I think generally speaking the best qualities filtered through.
> modern Linux with systemd, Wayland, dbus, and other technologies have deviated greatly from POSIX and other classical Unix technologies
Systemd is inspired by/imitating launchd; macOS did it first, to much less fanfare, and therefore much less awareness.
The evolution of Cocoa alongside GCD, XPC, and launchd would probably mean a lot of difficulty in backporting. Things shifting between kernel and userspace and launchd services with restrictive permissions won't be kind to a lot of software of reasonable complexity.
Objective-C++ does exist, so their paths didn't diverge so much that they didn't remain in each others' ecosystems on a permanent basis (on Apple, which is the only place both regularly intersected)
Hard not to get all conspiracy theorist about canary removals.
If I were to don my tinfoil hat, it seems possible to remove the canary with a boring incident for plausible deniability of a prior incident whose confidentiality is more strictly enforced.
The stricter gag order gets what it wants - non-disclosure of that particular gag order, the canary gets what it wants - removal after an incident.