There's literally nothing in the history of this project to suggest this is the case. Since day one systemd has had two and only two requirements. Systemd and systemd-journald, and the latter gives a configuration option to simply forward all logs to something else.

Everything else beyond this you think is "required" as part of systemd is exclusively the choice of your distribution maintainer. Direct your anger at the appropriate group.

Manufacturing round cells is a step into the past, not solving a problem of today. Tesla's "solution" to the 4680 problem, solved the problem only if you're using round cells. Most consumer devices (and many cars) no longer do for very good reason.

No, have you not been paying attention to the stories we've run about this on Slashdot?

No it doesn't. The only requirement is that batteries are accessible a) without barriers (in this case meaning non-reusable adhesives), b) with standard tools or where special tools are required that the manufacturer provides these tools (e.g. Apple's lobed screwdriver is allowed providing they ship the device with said screwdriver), and c) the battery available for purchase for 5 years.

Also the commission is currently reviewing if some devices need to be exempt.

Sure, if you ignore the details of cases and cherry pick the ones that suit your agenda then you'd come to that conclusion.

And impersonating another person. There were 3 crimes he was convicted of. He got off pretty lightly.

Nope, I'm just pointing out the solution to reducing road vehicle fatalities is not going back to horse drawn carriages. We live in a modern world which computers are a part of. The solution will need to involve the computer, not turning back the clock to the past.

I am to displease.

I accuse you of being a child rapist. Lock him up boys, his own rule demands it.

Trust should be limited to the activity you can't be trusted. Where I live employers can request from the police an approval. But that approval is compared to the requested job position.

E.g. if a bank askes the police for this history of a convicted paedophile, they will get a reply saying there's nothing of concern in the history. Likewise if a school asks about the criminal history of someone committed of money laundering they'll also be told there's nothing of concern. On the flip side if the school asks about the paedophile or the bank asks about the money launderer they'll get a hit saying the person has a criminal past related to their job application.

A fork that removes a completely optional feature that you can toggle off, is not a fork, it's just a waste of space on github repository that no one will use.

Why would anyone ever install this instead of just not using the field when using systemd? For any distribution or software which doesn't require this it is completely ignorable and not even mandatory to use in systemd. For any distribution of software which does require this it would be incompatible.

This software serves no purpose.

If you want simplicity you could always use a typewriter instead of a computer. That's sort of the core problem. The simpler you make things the more capability you give up in the process. Either that or you fake simplicity.

There was nothing simple about what systemd replaced initially. It replaced:
- An init system which couldn't function without a shitton of complex scripts extending 100+ lines just to start a program with no consistency.
- An init system which couldn't init anything that was event based which instead started another daemon to track those other programs, i.e. it was an init system which wasn't capable of starting all the services required to be stated.
- An init system which used files as a state rather than being able to actually track processes and then errored out constantly if something was left in a state that didn't match (e.g. smbd crashes, so when you send it a start command it fails saying it's already running despite that not being the case).
- A log system that couldn't capture all logs at all times.
- A log system that was actually split into multiple systems - some kernel driven, some driven by a daemon which in turn dumped text into a variety of files based on complex rules.

That's what simple and everything is a file gets you in reality. There was nothing simple about it.

You do you, but I'm happy trading some developer's management of complexity for my own simplicity as the end user.

It's him guys, I found the boomer. You did a great job of telling everyone you don't know how exams are run gramps.

Do a bit more reading. Chat GPT is a tool, a person is a person who can make their own decisions. When you cheat with ChatGPT you are responsible. When you cheat by paying someone to take an exam on your behalf then you are both responsible. When this is done for financial gain by one party it becomes criminal fraud.

The person jailed pleaded guilty to the following criminal offenses:
1. Fraud by false representation - by claiming to be someone you are not you're in breach of the Fraud Act 2006. ChatGPT doesn't do this, the cheater does this.
2. Cause computer to perform function to secure unauthorised access to a program/data - using someone else's credentials to access a computer system is a breach of the Computer Misuse Act 1990. ChatGPT doesn't do this, it only provides information, the cheater uses the computer.
3. Conceal/disguise/convert/transfer/remove criminal property - This one may be weird to some, but the name of the act should clarify: It's the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, you're liable here when you commit crime for profit.

Englishing has nothing to do with it. The University has nothing to do with it. What you think words mean is irrelevant. There are laws, laws have definitions, those definitions and laws applied to this case and the man was jailed by someone trained and competent to interpret those laws.

No you don't. You own a limited use license to those games. The fact that the licensor hasn't implement a revocation system is technical, not legal, nothing to do with sale, nothing to do with purchasing vs renting. In fact you may very well be illegally breaching the terms of the license agreement if you install it today (most license agreements explicitly stated it was limited to use on a single PC).

You're a pirate. Piracy still works today by the way.