dspearson

I don't follow. It allows citizenry to identify wage discrimination and other malpractices, people can get paid on the value of their work and not just how good they are at gaming the wage negotiations. Plus most of the civilised world has this thing called a "union" and "workers rights" that generally prevent your imagined scenario from happening.

What has medical data got to do with this? You can't very well go up to a disabled person and say, hey, you cost society more money, maybe you should have been born less disabled, you cost too much, pay more. Societal safety nets exist for a reason, and how much one is compensated for equal labour as your coworker... I don't see how it's related at all to the "make the disabled pay more" eugenics argument.

I work for one of the largest Swiss ISPs, and these mailboxes are still to this day read by actual people (me included), so it's sometimes worthwhile even today.

Under what circumstances would commercial companies be required to buy a license?! If they provide Linking as a Service?

I do the exact same for Illumos, just ripped ideas from depenguin.me (which is how I previously installed FreeBSD after they discontinued the rescue system).

I haven't noticed any difference or problems with the Android TV application vs the Android or web client. What exactly is broken or not great for you?

How can you commit treason against a foreign country?

It was not a state actor. There were plenty of high profile people and projects being owned just for the fun of it back then.

Next we'll be hearing that ~el8 was a CIA front. :)

If a child chooses to get a USA passport, surely this means renouncing Japanese citizenship?

This is a naïve question, but why on earth are unions isolated to one company so often in USA? Surely an industry-wide solution would be more effective.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work for these scumbags. It is a choice.

It is wrong. I'm sorry to be blunt, but here we are.

Just because pepsi tastes like coca cola, doesn't make it coca cola.

Open source/free software places no restrictions on use/modification/distribution, end of story. With the sole exception of copyleft, which disallows you to distribute & withhold source, i.e. stopping you from depriving others of the very freedom that you benefitted from.

This places restrictions on use. Ergo it is not open source. Attempting to muddy the waters by using hand-wavey "you get most of your freedom!" type talk just muddies the waters and is precisely why the term got trademarked and why a definition exists. And it really is not hard to understand.