4 ms·

The software developer who added the Easter egg was not employed or paid by EE, just sympathetic to them

• metadat 2y ago
  Then apparently I understand nothing, now I regret commenting. Thanks for the information, my mistake.
  • kalleboo 2y ago
    It's complicated and the information is all over the place hidden in reddit comments, the whole thing is a mess
    • firesteelrain 2y ago
      The firmware developer is really the one causing most of the problems. If not for him, this would have handled amicably between EE and DEFCON.
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      • krisoft 2y ago
        Does not appear to be the case? If not for him we would not know that there is a dispute between EE and DEFCON. DEFCON would be still pissed with EE that they went overbudget, and EE would be pissed that they were not paid what they think are owed. EE would also be pissed that their logo was removed from the case which (rightly or wrongly) they thought was part of their compensation. Without his actions we would be none the wiser about any of it, but clearly the relationship would be anything but amicable.
        • firesteelrain 2y ago
          It’s none of our business. He is some sort of poorman’s vigilante and even embedding an unauthorized Easter egg with a BTC address.
          • krisoft 2y ago
            > It’s none of our business. Thank you for your opinion. I will decide what is my business and what is not.
            • firesteelrain 2y ago
              Thank you for your opinion.
      • oefrha 2y ago
        No. It might have been kept hush hush without the stunt, but there’s nothing amicable about it. > EE has tried multiple times over the past months to negotiate fair compensation for work completed prior to June 7th, but attempts at resolution have been unsuccessful. > Once the manufacturing was fully completed, we were offered a one-time “take it or leave it” amount worth well under half of what we were owed pre-stoppage. Given that what we were owed was already discounted by 25% in order to hit agreed upon cost targets, this has had a huge impact on our small team. We are also still owed substantial sums for parts that we purchased on behalf of DEFCON for use in the badge. Again, all subsequent offers to negotiate a settlement in good faith have not received any productive response.
        • firesteelrain 2y ago
          It’s a time and materials contract. DEFCON has the right to cancel at any time for any reason.
          • oefrha 2y ago
            No one posted any contract (that I’ve seen). And even if true, there’s still nothing amicable about it. Btw you may have been commenting too much on something that’s “none of our business” according to you.
            • deleted 2y ago
              [deleted]
            • deleted 2y ago
              [deleted]
            • firesteelrain 2y ago
              Ha gal
      • dmitrygr 2y ago
        >The firmware developer is really the one causing most of the problems. If not for him, this would have handled amicably between EE and DEFCON. Defcon stopped paying and talking. They would have brushed this all under a rug
        • firesteelrain 2y ago
          EE went way over budget. DEFCON was right to cancel the contract. What’s your involvement anyways besides a free contributor to the emulator?
          • dmitrygr 2y ago
            "contributor" implies someone else participated, i feel i have been clear about the fact that every single bit of the firmware was my work. Nobody else worked on it.
            • firesteelrain 2y ago
              Your work that you gave away. No more data rights on the executable.