The difference is that a hostile takeover can’t happen.
Unless the founder still owns a majority of the shares, you can take control of a public company without needing the consent of the board (and CEO, founder, etc)
A hostile takeover doesn’t have to happen. If Gaben decides “fuck you all” and decides to close the company, then there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. It’s his company and it doesn’t owe you the privilege of continuing to exist.
Yeah, it doesn’t make much difference, I just commented on the low-hanging fruit of what was clearly incorrect.
My bigger problem is with your fear-mongering and the gibberish that assumes that self-hosted FOSS solutions are somehow a viable alternative for the majority of users. I’ll pick privacy-compromised convenient products 9 times out of 10 and actually spend my time doing things I want to do, and I’m pretty bored reading all the privacy nutjobs trying to tell me how to do things.
How does that make a difference? Anyhow, I meant to write privately owned. My mistake.
The difference is that a hostile takeover can’t happen.
Unless the founder still owns a majority of the shares, you can take control of a public company without needing the consent of the board (and CEO, founder, etc)
A hostile takeover doesn’t have to happen. If Gaben decides “fuck you all” and decides to close the company, then there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. It’s his company and it doesn’t owe you the privilege of continuing to exist.
Yeah, it doesn’t make much difference, I just commented on the low-hanging fruit of what was clearly incorrect.
My bigger problem is with your fear-mongering and the gibberish that assumes that self-hosted FOSS solutions are somehow a viable alternative for the majority of users. I’ll pick privacy-compromised convenient products 9 times out of 10 and actually spend my time doing things I want to do, and I’m pretty bored reading all the privacy nutjobs trying to tell me how to do things.