Yes, ultimately you don’t own the property you rent. The landlord has rights over the property too, and you have to factor that in when choosing whether to rent or buy.
I wonder to what extent this influences what is known as the "endowment effect" in economics. The particular chair I am sitting in and have for months, is it really a more valuable one because it helps me remember?
Now before we are quick to agree on a 'yes' -- to what extent do memories hold us back? Your teak bookcase for example reminds you of a positive accomplishment, and its loss would untether you, generally speaking not wanting to intrude. Now imagine someone who objectively should change, perhaps because your industry is dying. Too many mementos, a sign of reluctance, resistance even to change?
Yet change, wanted or not, is the one constant in our life.
I realize the article is about renting to save up (-- how's that going to work, btw? After all, someone needs to charge on top of the cost of owning). But a home of one's own like in the last century, really another cradle of identity, or mistaken materialism?
I have to say, this whole trend screams of cognitive dissonance.
"I can't afford to buy so I don't want to anyways..." sounds like one of the primary motivators. Renting expensive items? How's this different from leasing or renting a supercar you can't afford to show off to friends or clients? It's not.
There's for sure some cases where this is a practical solution, like moving to another city for a year or two and getting some temporary furniture. But in most other cases in screams of sour grapes and businesses seeking to profit from people bad at math.
Rent a coffee table for $50 a month for a few years and then be happy you don't have to move it when you change apartments? Run the math on those numbers and you'll realize you're likely a fool. Sure, if you're buying things like cheap ikea furniture it's not likely to appreciate in value but most real hardwood furniture is generational and something of an investment.
Regarding the dissonance, the this all has the side "if I don't own it, I won't feel the pain of loss" to it. Survival strategy in a precarious situation.
Open source is about transparency, which covertly tweaking the wording of a thread is not.
Yet since this issue got some more attention user "mholt" has changed the thread, now merely strongly claiming it were open source but not actually publishing or referring to the closed source portions, unable to confirm there were none and it were something innocuous like a backport from Go 1.13.
Nonetheless a use of force, him keeping the right to develop the discussion further to himself but denying the same to others.
Does Caddy run afould a LGPL? Is it about this? If you cannot bear sharing and the question "how did you solve this?", then don't claim to be an open source author.
Parts, the modified Listener, has not been open sourced. Caddy's author was quick to deflect and squash any discussion about what else is held private.
The easiest answer would have been a "sure, here's the link". Instead the thread has been locked for being off-topic, yet the original issue and the question concern the same thing.
As someone who is working on Caddy, I can assure you that Caddy is still very much open source! mholt and I have been working on version 2 which has a lot of improvements over the first version of Caddy. It's not in a releasable state yet.
We are currently at a stage where we are getting feedback from the community on our current progress. If you want to be a part of that, feel free to reach out to one of us.
Caddy 2 is under internal development, and will be open source as per https://caddyserver.com/blog/announcing-caddy-1_0-caddy-2-ca... Ofc, the thread has been locked, because it is off-topic, the linked issue is about listeners, not the development of Caddy 2.
Another reason why reproducible builds in open source are so important. The version of Caddy you can compile yourself is different from that you are offered as download. And there's nowhere a notice to be found about that intransparent move.
Caddy's build are reproducible as per https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Modules. The downloader offers you to extend Caddy with plugins, and this will change the hash of the binary compared to a straight build from the source code. Keep in mind that Telemetry is enabled by default in the source code, unlike @ the downloader, this changes the hash too.
