It's our hardware so we should be able to select another provider or host our own. Not that I consider ad tracking a "service".

Draw.io says it will use Apache but "with an extra line forbidding usage (...)". It is not the normal Apache license. The extra line is a big difference in principle.

I hate scamming people but I think that should be fixed in another way.

It seems "open source" means different things for different people.

If you could see the code but were not allowed to redistribute it then I'd call it "source-available".. but you can redistribute the code, in this unusual case.

Forbidding reselling to any degree makes it "non-free" (as in freedom), which is the important part. The term "open source" was created to speak about "free software" without the moral or political aspects of user freedom.

Crazy to see the thread of people using "open source" differently. The term "open source" may have successed in replacing the older term "free software" (in popularity) but apparently it can also fail to be clear. "Open" can mean various degrees of openess, or lack thereof in this case.

It's free as in free food but adding an extra line to restrict how it can be used, or with who, makes it non-free software (free as in freedom).

Later or Agree
No Disagree option

A rapist mentality.

I beseech you god of Irony, make it so Amazon workers can vote him out of office.

Do most technical Windows users know about Recall? Or is this the case of them not caring?

Tis but a symptom of the user's click-rate. Faces are the "shiny keys" for humans.

Totally uncool man.

Not sure what I could have expected from it back then. I just recall it being recommended online and ended up just using Win Media player (with the cool graphical effects).

I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.

One has to admit it's good that they released the source code (while it was available) so users can learn what their software is actually doing on their computer. Better for yourself as a dev too: you will probably avoid including other people's work in yours. However, wanting contributions while retaining the exclusive right to distribute the software is anti-collaborative. I'm reluctant to say it might as well be proprietary again but since it doesn't meet the standard of software freedom then it's equally not worth trying on my computer.

I find the negatives detract from the benefits too much, usually. Like having your arm cut off and then receiving lovemaking: I am no longer in the mood.

Every game tied to it's own console.

Seems I missed reading the last line where you said you would respect some cryptocurrencies. I misunderstood.

You make the point that this cannot happen but surely some really have the intention to make an e-currency that has long term, legal use?

Thrive: the cell-stage in Spore but more in-depth.

You float around looking for various compounds for energy and to grow. After growing you can add parts to the cell or modify it's membrane type or the behavior of AI-controlled copies (you lose if there are no others of your species when you die). You can also migrate to a new environment with different resources (including sunlight). The game ends when you live long enough or complete evolutionary objectives for which the next stage is a work in progress. It can often be easy or difficult to survive, depending on your choices.

Protip: you can modify the cell to be faster at the expense of less HP - would recommend.

My mistake.

We have examples of words being used to negatively identity specific minorities being purposely used by members of the minority to change public opinion.

I see no reason it couldn't happen the other way around: "to poison the word" once used by minorities to change public opinion.

walled garden

(Edit, For example..) Facebook control all aspects: you can only do what they want. Mastodon can be hosted and modified by anyone, it's freedom.

A closed platform, walled garden, (...) is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and/or media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or content. This is in contrast to an open platform, wherein consumers generally have unrestricted access to applications and content. - wikipedia