it is LGPL2 or later. So LGPL3 applies. So the anti tivoization clause applies.
That's the opposite of how that works. It's LGPL 2 or later. That means you can follow the terms of redistribution from either license. Either. Or.
Sure. But it won't be your usual Linux distro.
It will do the same jobs. Most of the software on which we depend predates the GPL3 and/or uses an even more permissive license without an anti-tivoization clause.
The most fortunate part of Bell Labs' situation, however, was that in being attached to a monopoly it could partake in long-term thinking... Without competition nipping at its heels, Bell Labs engineers had the luxury of working out difficult ideas over decades.
Was it the monopoly that made the difference? Or was it simply management smart enough to not only not kill the goose, but also to feed it? They had wins, they got more funding, they had more wins, repeat until they no longer got more funding and stopped getting wins. What's probably more important than why they succeeded is what happened at the end.
Installer level disabling of the installation of systemd, please.
If you're a Debian derivative user, it's called Devuan.
* Note: Removing systemd from a systemd-based system is madness. There's a reason Devuan exists, and it is that simply changing the init system on Debian results in a lot of breakage, which best illustrates the biggest problem with systemd.
systemd is an integral part of many Linux systems. Adding the birth-date to it is the issue here. It's not the right place.
Yes, that is literally the entire ethos behind systemd.
It's crazy to expect a distro maintainer in a sane country to need to yank it out of there manually
Yes, that is literally the entire situation with systemd.
This change literally could not be more on brand for systemd.
What were you thinking making changes like that without firstly checking with the entire community?
That's systemd in a nutshell. Only people like that would willingly work on a project like that.
A Linux distro (even preinstalled) cannot be closed source and/or unmodifiable by the end user, the GPL3 made sure of that.
The Linux kernel is GPL2 and glibc is LGPL, and you can construct a complete userland without any GPL3 components. Also, you seem to be under some weird misapprehension that the federal government will follow the law, which it has never done across the board.
Slavery and many other such things were once legal.
Amendment XIII
Section 1: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction".
Section 2: "Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation".
Emphasis mine.
The hate really should be directed at the politicians who pushed for these age gate laws
Collaborators can get it.
For the true paranoid, if you need to sandbox, you're doing it wrong.
Everyone is doing it wrong, that's why we need to sandbox.
Even if you were perfect, you wouldn't have time to do everything yourself, so you would still want sandboxing to protect you from the efforts of others.
We've come full circle to the tech community deciding what's proper for our neighbors. ChatGPT is free to decide not to include adult stuff, and celebrity/CSAM should totally be illegal, but "The proper use of AI is as a tool, not as a friend, lover or therapist, and especially not as an addiction" is how we get the government regulating how adults use the tools at their disposal.
Aside from CSAM and defamatory stuff we don't have the right to decide what's proper for someone else.
Eventually peer to peer training (Petals using Hivemind, etc.) will lead the way.
At least they didn't do a Tumblr and have the feature put in, then wait for millions to be using it... and then yank the rug out from under them.
We saw how that ended.
Fortunately there are alternatives.
Tried and tested slippery slope argument? On slashdot?
It is psychologically engineered to engage a human's attention. Modern web marketing is shady as hell and there really is no reason to try and defend the practices.
So how about we prohibit shady business practices. There is limited time and space in this world, so let's shutdown the garbage businesses that do us no good and leave more time and space and capital for those offering a legitimate goods and services.
The first mistake the user did was open their wallet. They bought a PC with shitty unstable Windows drivers. Microsoft will still sign buggy drivers. And they don't hold vendors accountable for fixing and maintaining drivers, so if all your bugs aren't squashed in a couple of years you will have a computer that is never really going to be stable.
The story on Linux is different. You have to work really hard to hunt down a machine where the hardware is supported. Ideally because the vendor open sourced and upstreamed the support. But frequently because someone reverse engineered it and got the drivers into the official kernel image your chosen distro uses. This at least has some chance of being maintained and fixed for the more egregious crashes over the next several years. Not a 100% guarantee, but given that you paid $0 for Linux, that's still quite a bargain.
[A computer is] like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. -- Joseph Campbell
