I’m not complaining; I’m clarifying for less informed readers. It’s a subtle and often misleading distinction.

Calling a license that leads to more proprietary software “even more open source” is absolutely debatable. The only extra restriction is disallowing free software becoming proprietary, which promotes more openness overall.

You’re not wrong by any means, but people should understand the actual tradeoff when considering licenses.

More open strictly in that it allows free software to be rolled up into proprietary software.

A friend gave me the 6-CD “power pack” of Mandrake 10 that could install a quite wide range of optional software completely offline. Hooked me too.

That does sound like a bit much for my daily driver; I’ll have to check it out in a VM sometime. It warms my heart that a distro community can have such longevity, and I think the simplicity has to be a big part of that.

Isn’t the lack of dependency management a huge pain on Slackware? I think Gentoo is my forever distro, but I’m very curious about Slackware.

‘Thy’ is the disused informal ‘your’. There’s ‘thou’/‘thee’ but that’s still second-person.

VPN, as it is sold by YT sponsorships, is a scam.

It’s not cold, but it’s-a broken, hallelujah!

Chrome as well, but the point stands that it is wild to say those companies started from open source like Bluesky has.

The closest true interpretation I can think of is that they, and most companies, fork open source software with permissive licenses since they can legally derive proprietary software from it. That’s why I’m a staunch (A)GPL boi myself.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

The self-domestication of the Cat, 10,000 BCE (colorized)