Recently the news broke that Microsoft are acquiring GitHub. Effusive opinions flowed from all directions: some saw the acquisition as a sensible fit for Microsoft to better support developers, and some saw it as a tyrant getting their grubby fingers on open source's ecosystem. I am thrilled for Microsoft and GitHub for many reasons, and there will be a bright future ahead because of it, but I have been thinking more about the reaction some of the critics have had to this, and why. I find it fascinating that there still seems to be a deep-seated discomfort in some about Microsoft and their involvement in open source. I understand that this is for historical reasons, and many moons ago Microsoft were definitely on the offensive against open source. I too was critical of Microsoft and their approach back in those days. I may have even said 'M$' instead of 'MS' (ugh.) Things have changed though. Satya Nadella, their CEO, has had a profound impact on the company: they are a significant investor and participant in open source across a multitude of open source projects, they hire many open source developers, run their own open source projects (e.g. VSCode), and actively sponsor and support many open source conferences, events, and initiatives. I know many people who work at Microsoft and they love the company and their work there. These are not microserfs: they are people like you and me. Things have changed, and I have literally never drunk Kool-aid; this or any other type. Are they perfect? No, but they don't claim to be. But is the Microsoft of today a radically different company to the Microsoft of the late nineties. No doubt. Still though, this cynicism exists in some. Some see them as a trojan horse and ask if we can really trust them? A little while ago I had a discussion with someone who was grumbling about Microsoft. After poking around his opinion, what shook out was that his real issue was not with Microsoft's open source work (he was supportive of this), but it was with the fact that they still produce... What did Microsoft do? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - changed the way they view open source - changed the logo on their software - changed the cost of proprietary software
changed the way they view open source

The sighting of a killer whale (or orca) can be rare, but they do love to hunt and play in the waters between Vancouver and Seattle, so one of the activities we absolutely wanted to do (in addition to the harbour seaplane flight) was to go whale watching. Just South of Vancouver, in the quaint Historic fishing village of Steveston we hopped aboard our boat, and spent the day on the water cruising the coast looking for whales, other marine mammals and seabirds. The regular chug-chug-chug of the boat motor for a couple of hours lulled me into a meditate state as we sped our way over the State line from Vancouver, back down to the waters of Washington State. The shimmer of the water all dappled in the sunlight, the slow, measured tones of our guide and snuggling into my warm jacket against the sharp breeze off the coast was just enough to make me forget my worries, and zone out from all of my modern day dilemmas. Honestly, it needs to be prescribed on the NHS. Forget hauling yoga mats and sitting in sweaty concrete rooms with patterns trying to hide the utilitarian backdrop, just hop on a boat out from Vancouver. Not having much success closer to the British Columbia shores, our captain decided to head south past the Canadian/American border. Incredibly, the resident killer whales of the San Juan Islands are the most studied whales in the world; they, in turn, have observed humans for at least six thousand years. Stable family groups, called pods, represent several generations and include grandmothers (the pod leaders), adolescents, infants, and huge bulls. Each family member is recognized by its distinctive markings and can live as long as a human. Much of what is known about the orca whale's highly-organized social life has been learned from the resident pods in the San Juan Islands of Washington. What is the author's occupation? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - scuba diver - not enough information - whale trainer - marine biologist
not enough information

It would have to be this Donald Trump once cashed a $0.13 check In 1990, writer from a "Spy Magazine" had a great idea for a prank: "What would happen if you sent checks for small amounts to celebrities and saw who cashed them, putting to test the theory that every man (and woman) has a price? In their words: "We could however, send them checks for minuscule sums of moneysums so small they couldn't fund as much as a minute of the recipients' existenceand see who would bother to bank these teensy amounts of money." Spy thought "some subterfuge" would be necessaryit'd be suspicious to get a check from the magazine that lampooned so many of the intended recipients. This was specifically true for Trump, who Spy once famously referred to as a "short-fingered vulgarian." So, they created a fully funded and incorporated company called National Refund Clearinghouse, which allowed them to open a checking account. Then they drafted a letter explaining that the check was a refund for a small overcharge that had occurred in 1988what the celebrities had been overcharged for was never mentioned. They sent the checks out (initially for $1.11) to 58 well-known people like Cher, Henry Kissinger, and, of course, Donald Trump. Of the 58, 26 cashed the checksDonald included. The magazine drafted a followup letter and checks for $0.64 to those 26 people to see who would take more free money. Thirteenincluding Donald Trumpdeposited the checks worth two quarters, a dime, and four pennies into their banks. Then they went for one last score: in honor of those 13 people, 13 more checks for $0.13. Two people cashed them: a Saudi arms dealer named Adnan Khashoggi, and Donald Trump. Seriously." I really don't know if this is the most "cheapskate" thing, on just CRAZY fiscal responsibility. But if I had to pick, this would get my vote resources: Splinter - The truth hurts Spy Magazine probably feel that 25% of celebrities are Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - giving - helpful - cheap
cheap