As a techno-geek, I can appreciate a good demonstration of technological capability. As a person, I can also appreciate that just because we can does not mean we should.

There are other actors. A lot of other actors. I am certain there are several that could have played this part well. Let one of them do it.

Learn the lesson: don't do this again.

The FSF holds copyright on the AGPLv3. In order to use the AGPLv3, you must comply with the license on the license.

A version of the AGPLv3 that is modified without the permission of the FSF is not valid, as it does not comply with the license on the AGPLv3.

You could write your own license using very similar terms to the AGPLv3 plus other terms you have specified, but if you refer to it as "AGPLv3" it must be the AGPLv3 as provided by the FSF (per the license on the AGPLv3).

This entire debate has happened before.

This was not a secret.

When my business was selling on Amazon, it was spelled out in the agreement: We were required to sell on Amazon at our lowest online price. We could match that price on other channels, but not go lower. This included sales thru our own site.

Enforcement varied. If they found out, you were in trouble. A violation would result in a "strike" (warning) against your account. Multiple strikes would result in suspension from selling on Amazon for 30 days. Additional strikes could result in termination of your seller account.

For those that missed it... Anthropic proposed to code the restrictions into the model itself. Other companies have proposed putting these restrictions in their contract -but lack any way of verifying or enforcing them beyond taking the government's word for it.

Google has proposed additional language in its contract with the department to prevent its AI from being used for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous weapons without appropriate human control

Google is about to be declared a threat to national security! Blocked from doing business with anyone who does business with the US Government! OMG! Supply chain risk! Terrorists! /s (Hey, it happened to Anthropic...)

All of my services (at home and for business, including self-hosted and collocated servers) have been dual-homed with IPV4 and IPV6 for decades. I just can't grasp services that don't include IPV6 connectivity in this modern world.

The only problem with national ID cards in America is the requirement to use them to exercise your rights without first ensuring that all Americans have them.

Some people insist on treating their EVs the same as their old petrol vehicles. Run it down as far as they can and then charge it to maximum at the fastest HVDC charger they can find -where they pay the highest rates for the privilege.

Why would evolution no longer apply to us ? OK: our technology, medicine, etc might mean that some pressures might be reduced but they are still there and others will appear. Eg: we do not need to be as strong, so weaker people are not so selected against, so more weaker people survive; our modern diets are causing health problems, so there will be pressure to better cope with them; ...

They did it with rare-earths... it is not about economic sense it is about power.

Until the rug-pull happens and China stops selling us those cheap cars... and we have no ability to make our own. That is what we need to protect against: not Ford's profit margin, but the ability to manufacture our own when our adversaries cut us off.

I mean... kind of.

I am not concerned about the random surveillance tech built in to my car. To me that is a red herring: it sounds plausible, but does it matter whether it is Chinese or American spyware in my car?

He is right that China subsidizes entire industries to become rapidly and wildly successful. China does this in ways that we cannot compete with: not by cutting a fat check to a single manufacturer, but by providing a favorable environment for the entire industry to succeed -no matter the human or environmental harm caused. We cannot afford to give up our manufacturing industry to China by buying their (better and cheaper) cars... just to face a rug-pull when we become dependent on them.

This does not mean we (as a nation) are best served by locking them out of our market completely. If we do not adapt how we do business, we will never be able to compete. We will condemn ourselves to subsisting on outdated rotting equipment. We need to make better cars, cheaper, ourselves. We need to find a way to do that without shooting ourselves in the foot -socially, economically, or environmentally.

If the tools are so good that you are afraid they will be used to expose your security flaws... maybe you should use the tools to find the security flaws yourself, and then fix them rather than declaring security thru obscurity.

This is a fig leaf over the desire to back out of the open source community now that the product has reached profitability.

Hopefully someone cares enough to fork the latest open source version and run them out of business with a better product that remains open.

This is not the same as a loss... it is more of a "fuck you" to a system that lacks enforceable jurisdiction.

1. make announcement about pivot to AI infrastructure
2. stock goes up
3. SELL!!