And to be fair, third party apps often bypassed their ads. So Reddit had a legitimate grievance there.

Reddit has an ad-free subscription, Reddit Premium. The sensible thing for Reddit to do would have been to limit third-party app access to Premium subscribers, but they demanded the app developers pay up instead of the users.

Their list of “patrons” is here, and Mozilla and Framework aren’t on it.

Framework is not mentioned there. The list of patrons doesn’t mention Framework either.

Floppy is a fork of Yamtrack that recently got its own name. From the notes on that release (emphasis mine):

I’m still not a professional developer; I’m an enthusiastic maintainer using AI coding tools to build the media tracker I want to use. Floppy is now a standalone project based on the incredible work of FuzzyGrim/Yamtrack, independently maintained and supported by @dannyvfilms. Yamtrack import and documented compatibility paths remain supported, but users install Floppy directly rather than treating an upstream container replacement as a migration plan.

Capital expenditures are for things that are expected to last a long time, like buildings and vehicles, so I guess the accounting rules around them are meant to allow the costs to be realized over a similarly long time. The idea is probably that companies would be less likely to invest in capital if it meant taking a big hit all at once. But I’m not an accountant.

How can something be profitable, but also have negative cash flow?

It’s been about thirty years since I took an accounting class, but I think capital expenditures like this AI spending are amortized (deferred?) over several years and don’t fully count towards present expenses. So the chunk that counts for this quarter/year can still be small enough to make the company profitable (income > expenses). Free cash flow I would guess is money that came in minus money actually spent, so something like a $1m capital expenditure might count as $100k for this year’s expenses but the full $1m for calculating cash flow.

Microsoft is not going to remove .NET to attract software developers when they want developers to use .NET. Not having access to software that uses .NET probably wouldn’t be a good trade off for how little removing it from Windows would do to make Windows lighter.