Gaza is definitely no threat, that’s why I thought that the whole world (politically, not necessarily the people) already accepted that Israel will not stop there until it has taken Gaza, West Bank and maybe even Golan (without the people that lived there of course…). With continued weapon shipments and other material needed for that from its allies of course.
However, the US engaging in a war against Iran would be, well, I don’t know how to put it… some serious shit…
What I still do not get is why they attacked the embassy of a country that always was clearly hostile towards them and has quite some military power. I mean right now with the war in Gaza, don’t they have enough on their plate?
Edit (finally could @-mention): As @wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works mentioned, it must have been clear from the beginning that this is a serious violation of international law.
Well, then you have to find another name for that kind of software and define it that way. That’s what I meant with that being a different thing, because if you look up the definitions and freedoms of the term “Free Software”, the term “Open Source” or “Libre Software”, and most other “free” licenses there is no mention of making the software available at no cost to everyone. It was not even the idea when the first free license was created, historically speaking.
That does not mean that it’s a bad idea. I certainly would support such an effort, i.e. to make software available to everyone at no cost. Also, what’s wrong with doing it the classic way of making goods available to “poor third world countries, students, kids” through donations or state supported programs? Do you think the producers don’t get paid in that cases?
Either way, my point is simply that we are discussing different things when it comes to the freedoms in software licenses of FLOSS and providing something valuable for society at no cost.
Yes, I should have used some other term here. However, I think the message came across.
Richard Stallman was the first developer to get paid for selling Free Software (the emacs editor) and in the original, first idea it was always intended that Free Software may and even should cost something. It was not intended as anti-capitalism software. It’s free as in freedom, not as in free beer.
The idea that it is bad or not ethical for somebody working on Free Software to get paid is absurd.
There may be different names for the same thing, like Free Software, Open Source, Libre Software, and therefore acronyms like FLOSS, however, something called Communist Software, Anti-Capitalism Software, Money-is-Bad Software or similar would be a different thing and must not be confused with the former one.
I’m not saying that nobody should impose the restriction that people working on software are not allowed to take money for it. I’m saying that software with this restriction would be something different (and does not exist afaik) and as far as I am concerned I don’t care about that kind of software or philosophy behind it. Just leave the devs that manage to get paid for working on FLOSS alone and do your own thing.
We need to read the whole thing, or just scroll to the end, tick the box at “I agree” and click “ok”.
Indeed, they are so charitable and selfless, always looking out for us, I cannot hold back the tears of thankfulness any more. It’s too much for me. I feel like I am taking too much advantage of them without ever being able to give enough back. For their sake I will stop exploiting them and cancel my subscription to help them save themselves.
Well, the document itself might have been secret… but that’s like labelling yesterday’s weather forecast secret… ;-D