The short answer is 'not yet.'

The long answer is that if I actually published it, I'd be publishing a half baked backend that, frankly, is a project unto itself. Moreover, I'm not the only one working on that part of it, and the consensus is that any shithead employee of Google or Facebook that stumbles on it would almost immediately pass it up the chain, and our work would be picked apart and rewritten and pumped full of surveillance software and they'd probably have the balls to sue us, claiming they did it first.

Then there's the fact that other projects I'm building use much of the same tech, including a repo with a veritable assload of features. And so, when the backend is somewhat functional, my repo will be practically stable, and the still unfinished other projects, including a forum platform, will be dumped on the repo.

Of course, if we go through with the sweeping changes we might make to the backend, it could actually move the other projects up, and the repo could theoretically be done less than a year from now, so it's really dependent on if we decide to bin ~6,000 man-hours of work.

EDIT: Oh, and these answers here are, I think, a pretty good testament to how hardcore I'll be about my AMAs.

Not if it's all P2P, and the underlying tech gives people initial anonymity.

I wanna be clear that Voat wouldn't exactly be something I want to destroy, and if my product affects their usership, I plan on reaching out to Putt and helping him move 100% of Voat's data over, right down to every buried comment and every shitpost. I like this place, I just don't see it as sustainable. Voat exists as a far right haven from the far left nonsense of Reddit. My service will allow people to echo chamber themselves if they see fit, but it'll also have common ground areas where arguments get insane and there are no moderators. The idea is to make the internet lawless again.

Damore's lawsuit or not, let's see how the Liberals like it when my startup hires with a bias towards conservatives, especially veterans, and refuses to use the visa program. And none of their shitty businesses will have any government contracts, because I'll provide any product we make to the government at cost. The entire premise of my business is to compete as aggressively as possible. And if I had a dollar for every idea I plan on bringing to market, I'd have starting capital.

Yeah, that's probably hard to believe, but I'm pretty confident that my first few projects are 'decacorn' (as in $10B pre IPO, not that I have any intentions of going public) material on their own.

Honestly, I read the cover and quickly remember that it's never gonna be the medium I'll learn best from, at which point I stop.

fragile is a good word for their position, yeah.

Agreed, to a degree. Linux can win this fight, just look at the rise of Chromebooks.

Hell yeah. I always root for the underdog unless they happen to somehow be worse than the market establishment. Disruption is a beautiful thing. Were I AMD, I'd put a huge amount of money into contributing code to Linux, then work closely with game studios and Valve to revolt against MSFT.

Or you know, for a couple months before new things start looking familiar. I taught my grandpa Dart.

Its never too late, do you have any code experience?

repository based distribution ftw, like Cydia and most Linux distros.

I gave up on MSFT in like, middle school. I've been on a full boycott for the last year or so, apart from Minecraft on PS4 (sometimes I like something more stable than my Pixel 2015 LS, and I'm not building a rig until Vega and Ryzen are looking good. Once that happens, I might still wait for APUs, then build an awesome rig at a later date, assuming that either AMD will keep up the good work, or (not holding my breath for this next one) Nvidia starts making CPUs. I hate Intel for the same reason I hate Microsoft, they're the mob of the tech industry. Cooperate, or we'll come for your kneecaps ability to sell computers.

Gimme a couple months, it'll be ready for GitHub soon.