I didn’t understand your sentence. But: Having concerns is valid.
Having them in the context of this story/ad is misplaced.
IBM invested 1B$ in Linux all the way back in year 2000 (imagine how much that is worth with tech inflation), and they did it again years later.
That 1M$ is nothing. It’s not nearly enough to control the Rust foundation for one year, let alone controlling the Rust project as a whole. Calling it a “Vote of Confidence in Rust’s Future” was probably a good-spirited joke from the author, at least I hope it was.
Note that IBM still doesn’t control Linux (even after acquiring RedHat), and we still have no problem calling them evil. Some of us still have no problem calling MS evil either, although many of the new crop of developers won’t, because for them the chance to have the financial privilege of working there someday outweighs any moral considerations. Incidentally, there is a good intersection between this group, and the group that takes moral posturing about whatever in-group approved cause of the month to the maximum. Ironic, isn’t it?
This is effective advertisement, not a donation. A real ad (with a campaign) would probably have cost much more, and wouldn’t continue to be propagated for free months after the ad campaign is over, like this peace of news.
This type of ad is also much harder to filter/block, since not only it appears to be site-native, but also topic-native.
Add comment