Are you so shallow enough not to buy a product or service from a company that could not speak English?
I live in Latin America. If we want to export to the US or some parts of Europe, we need to speak English.
If we want to do business with the Chinese, English helps, but Chinese can be better. If anything, speaking their language means you care enough about them particularly, enough to invest a significant part of your resources in them.

Well, Tiananmen is a big issue when it comes to censorship.
The accepted fact is that we know the truth, and poor, oppressed Chinese people do not, due to censorship.
If it turns out we, free people, believed a lie all these years, it would mean our information is just as doctored as what the Chinese get.
That would mean that the rulers of the west are not better than the guys who build the Great Chinese Firewall, it would only mean that the West methods, mainly propaganda, are better than more direct ones.

Google is in this for business. Each browser they support costs them money, and adds a small amount of HTML and a possible point of failure.

The issues you talk about are due to the high cost of vendor lock in, when the vendor you choose is not the winner in the field, of just abandons products. It's not resonable to expect Google to pay for some of those costs.

choosing the wrong proprietary vendors is abandonment.

He said he was a devout christian. Their religion tells them not to care whether something is natural or good by its own. What matter is what the scriptures say, or what they can read them to say in the case of evangelists, or what the pope-...-priest/tradition says, in the case of catholics.

It's easy.
The BSD license gives other distributors permissions to repackage your code, and give nothing back but a written mention.
The GPL does not allow that, distributors need to show code. If they fail to, they fall out of the license, and under simple copyright infringement.

There's nothing to prove, the GPL protects against freeloaders, and the BSD does not. By design.

What they do is unacceptable. They are not trustworthy.
It's not reasonable to install a software in your phone, giving it access to your personal data and data plan, when you know that its publishers like to spend other peoples money, no matter the purpose.

It could be argued whether the victims deserve it or not, but the publishers are not to be trusted.

Gorilla, circle, dot, green, Toyota, Al Jazeera, and Chocolate Chip flavour

There is a western, christian country, that is in the news at all times, known for seizing laptops at borders and keeping your data.
In fact, when I travel there, I don't carry my laptop or any personal/work data with me, that's how worried I am.

There is no free part of the world. There are only shades of grey. There are places where you are safer and worse places, but enemies of freedom exist and act everywhere.
Add to that the fact that your definition of freedom probably doesn't match what some other people believe, and the whole "free world" concept becomes a dumb idea.

And you probably make enough. The world is full of people who risk their lives to make a dime. Otherwise, there would be no cops, no antenna installers, no tall buildings. That is because they can make a better living that way than staying safe.

When the customer finds a result for a search, whatever engine they used, Bing takes advantage of it.
You can complain about Microsoft violating the users privacy, but it's not taking anything from Google, just from the users.
It's bad, because users are not aware of this, but Google is no victim here. They don't own search results.