The additional work doesn't go away when you add support for higher end systems that most can't afford to use, let alone want to.

This premise, that progress requires abandon, is taken for granted because of commercial interests.

If people were as interesting in maintaining their projects as they were in riding the new wave, there'd really be no issue.

Believe it or not, my point was exactly what I said it was; without subtext. Fwiw, the reason I made it is that not supporting older systems is something peoole tend to do to appease the commercial interests of their employers, and the broader and higher classes of employers. Imo, it sounds more like you told your boss that their strategy didn't align with their own interests than what you said to the quote in question.

You can't expect the rest of the world to make their lives harder to support your niche.

I bet you wouldn't say that shit to your boss, or a billionaire

I don't thing the fsf deserve to be catching strays on this

Can one of the unscrupulous fucks who thinks incentivising closed source projects to go fully cloud based is a good idea at least shell out the tokens for a rewrite of FL Studio? Even just the Spitfire Audio LABS suite (from before they got hijacked by splice)?

Remember, kids: it's not a breadline if the capitalists make you wait in line for no damned reason.

There's another notch where you only ask questions and do the writing alone

Start with a proof of concept distributed file sharing network

Expressiveness isn't the problem. No doubt it can be less efficient and re-usable but constructed languages are mostly syntactical interfaces to subsets of the semantics we express in natural languages all the time. By using them we can precisely express combinations that can be difficult to convey in natural languages without losing time to perspecctive and interpretation but that can only a problem if you're in a hurry. In most cases, it'd be far more limiting to have to express natural semantics in a constructed language than the other way around. What's more is that all the orimitives of these languages are developed using the same strategies we use in natural languages. It's just the morphs and structures that differ.

I agree, but bracing for isn't the same as shitting on