I get how hard it is to cut down on airline emissions. But the strict requirements on budget has significantly improved that number over the past few decades. Aircraft engines today are much less polluting than they were 30 or 50 years ago. Perhaps the goals shouldn't be dropped so easily.

What scares me about this is how lightly climate change is taken. "Yeah, I don't think we can do it. So we're going to just stop trying". Do you even realize what sort of trouble the humanity and this planet is in? Especially for a country dominated by its coastline?

They diverted the funding for AI? AI is already a way for rich crooks to steal and make money off public information, if not an outright hype that grifters employ to attract funding for their devious pursuits. None of this is AI's fault. But politicians should understand the type of people they are funding, instead of ignorantly falling for buzzwords.

The rest of the world should sanction these US-based thugs and shame them constantly on the media. It's infuriating to see them commit all these atrocities and then smugly pretend to be the heroes.

The common factor between their support of Zionism and their domestic antisemitism, is hate. They support Zionism since they hate the Muslims. They're domestically antisemitic because they hate the Jews. They're motivated and driven by hate. They are the poison that the civilized world dies on.

Islam includes many Jewish and Christian figures among their numerous prophets. (They believe Mohammed to be the last among them). That includes John the Baptist and Jesus himself (and possibly more). Since Jews had a hand in their death, that could be the reason why they make this claim.

While they're partially correct, this antisemitic trope ignores a lot of context and nuances. For example, Jesus himself was a Jew and so were his initial followers. And there are strong reasons to believe that his crucifixion was a vicious threat towards the Jews of Judea. John's story also has similar nuances. Unfortunately, all those contexts are neglected while creating the propaganda narrative of the evil Jew.

Of course they're learning. Learning how to bullshit and gaslight normal people into accepting their dystopian and draconian ambitions.

We probably never will.

A trillion dollar company demanding 30% cut of revenue of small developers, on top of annual developer fees and exorbitantly priced hardware with zero reparability and severe environmental impact isn't monetarily expensive enough for you? That isn't loyalty. It's stupid fanaticism that harms everyone else. And I don't want to even start about the petty part.

The answer isn't that simple. India always had its share of bigots. But until a decade ago, the same level of hate speech would have ended them up in jail.

The ruling party back then (congress) was a bit corrupt and the opposition back then (BJP, the current ruling party) used it to dethrone them. So you would expect the BJP to be less corrupt? No - they are much worse. But the BJP's strategy was to subvert any institution that could challenge them - media, judiciary, CAG, investigation agencies..

Eventually the bigots realized that hate speech received no punishment. Meanwhile, BJP ensured that critical media was severely punished and oppressed. This is what led to the spread of bigotry in the media. While the crimes of their opponents are often exaggerated, their own crimes are rarely even mentioned. In true Nazi style, people were exposed to lies and half truths over a decade.

Of course. You didn't think that they would take back a user-hostile greed-motivated feature without an alternative, did you?

So, are Red Hat violating the GPL? No.

But what about this business of cancelling subscriptions? Isn’t that a restriction in violation of the GPL? Not in my view.

You are just repeating the exact narrow definition that Redhat/IBM's lawyer leeches found to justify what they did. Yes it's legal - but by no means in the spirit of GPL or any FSF or OSI approved license.

Starting with the FSF definition, ANY software from OUTSIDE that RH builds on (this includes the kernel and numerous other parts) comes to them with 4 assured freedoms. One of them is the freedom to distribute the software or the modified forms of it. To put it in short, what RH says is - "You're still free to exercise the freedom - but we will stop doing business with you if you do". While this is not against the letter of the license, this is most certainly AGAINST the INTENT of the license.

One might ask, if that's the intent of the license, why does the license allow such a loophole? To put it simply, the creators of the license created it based on certain guidelines. But they couldn't foresee all the ways in which the license would be twisted, violating its intent. This happens from time to time - causing the licenses to undergo revisions. For example, GPLv3 was created due to what FSF calls Tivoization - a practice that violates the intent without violating the license. Hell, this is against even OSI's intent.

However, just because there are loop holes in the license to violate its intent, doesn't mean that it's ethical or moral to take advantage of it. When some company does so, it's nothing short of parasitism. In this case, RH managed to suppress GPL after profiteering for decades from it.

In my view, the “community” reaction was terrible.

Clearly, your view is heavily colored. Remember that the community's reaction was only a response to what RH did. You clearly are not seeing the possibility that what RH did is way way worse and extremely damaging towards the community and FOSS principles.

If you give away the results of Red Hat’s hard work to productize CentOS Stream into RHEL,

This is a very myopic, one-sided and biased take. A lot of people who are complaining are contributors to the work RH uses. This isn't just about some bit of work. This is about trust that forms the foundations of the FOSS movement. People will be hesitant to contribute to any project that RH may take and profit like this. RH is using their code in a way that they were not expecting. What RH did is to fundamentally exploit that trust and then betray it.

Nothing has been taken from you except access to FUTURE Red Hat product ( other than totally for free via CentOS Stream of course ).

The same narrow definitions to justify the malicious intent. Remember that distributing the recipe for 'FUTURE Red Hat product' wouldn't be wrong in any way if RH hadn't created the new clause - that they will stop supplying if you did. They had to invent a way to override the intent of FOSS.

So, Red Hat is going quite above and beyond the licensing by providing their subscribers code to the entire distribution. Yes, beyond.

They don't have a business if they didn't distribute the source code. There are numerous other offerings that give you the same services without the source code. They are doing nothing beyond what it takes for them to make money. So, their moral superiority arguments are based on false premises.

I'm honestly very tired of people shilling the false arguments of corporates that exploit regular folks to make money. The stories of how RH damaged the entire Linux ecosystem for supporting their business is too long for me to even get into. For now, I will just say that RH's entire business model has been to make the Linux ecosystem too complicated for anyone else to reasonably manage or modify. So, please stop giving this greedy corporation more credit than what it's worth and stop demonizing the people who complained when their reasonable expectations were violated.

The problem isn't that FOSS projects are getting abandoned. The problem is the consumer mindset where FOSS projects are considered as the free (gratis) equivalent of proprietary software - a well packaged and eternally maintained ware that you just install and run. This is a convention that bigtech cultivated in order to get free labor and support.

The original free (libre) software philosophy was designed with sharing in mind. Somebody writes software to scratch an itch - i.e solve their own or someone else's problem. And then they leave the source code for others to adapt and use. You found a software that you like, but is abandoned? No problem! Just take it, update it and use it. I have done this. Don't know how to code? Ask someone else to do it for you - perhaps for a price.