[metadat]

I'm struggling to reconcile this response vs the Bitcoin address "Easter egg" and the other claims in the prior article (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41211519), and a few other aspects.

Such a gross "oversight" does not reflect the care they're claiming to have exercised.

This part also seems a tad over the top and dramatic:

> We are especially grateful that Dmitry was not hurt in the physical removal he was subjected to as a result of his demonstration of solidarity

This individual chose to not comply with the venue operator's request to leave the stage, so they pretty gently escorted him away, as can be seen in the video which has been linked in every prior submission. Risk of injury was negligible, if any.

So I'm left uncertain which story is to be trusted here.

To be fair, it's clear DefCon has previously been fueled by Supermen and Superwomen who threw themselves under the bus (possibly were exploited) by working for free or nearly free to deliver. People deserve to be compensated for their work according to the terms of whatever employment agreement was signed, not the games that have been played here.

If quality of work was misaligned, it'd be another matter, but neither party has alluded to this.

[kalleboo]

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

[metadat]

Then apparently I understand nothing, now I regret commenting.

Thanks for the information, my mistake.

[kalleboo]

It's complicated and the information is all over the place hidden in reddit comments, the whole thing is a mess

[firesteelrain]

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.

[oefrha]

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]

It’s a time and materials contract. DEFCON has the right to cancel at any time for any reason.

[krisoft]

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]

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.

[dmitrygr]

  >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]

EE went way over budget. DEFCON was right to cancel the contract.

What’s your involvement anyways besides a free contributor to the emulator?

[wokwokwok]

> So I'm left uncertain which story is to be trusted here

I mean, it seems pretty clear to me that defcon is in the wrong here, and everything else is just drama.

Filing the serial numbers off to hide that EE was to credit for it, getting f’d at a hidden screen that credited them.

Come on, fuck off. EE did the work here. Not crediting them sucks.

The rest of the stuff, I really dont care about, but you can’t put a ribbon on what they did. Remastering the injection mold cast? Removing the logo? That sucks.

:(

Give credit where credit is due.

If you didn’t make it, don’t try to pretend you did.

[dylan604]

> If you didn’t make it, don’t try to pretend you did.

Just because you don't visibly put the creator's logo on the thing does not mean you are pretending that you made the thing. Your Ford F150 does not have the logos of the 3rd party companies that programmed the ECUs, made the brake pads, etc, and yet I doubt anyone here would think that Ford is pretending they did whatever.

This is not agreeing with what was done, just brake checking your broadbrushing