You didn't get my point. AWS is incentivized to offer the best product they can sell to their customers, regardless of license. If the Rust core utils reach feature parity with GNU core utils, then Rust's memory safety makes it the superior product (at least on security) and an easy sell to customers.

That is the point at which the license choice matters for what I said: when it's widely adopted by AWS customers. If it isn't GPL, then AWS is free to do what I described, and incentivized to do so.

Sure, if AWS customers widely adopted the BSD tools for whatever reason, then it'd be the same situation. I just don't see any particular reason for that to happen.

I don't think a Linux anti virus program would be such a big security win. Phishing is the biggest security threat to most users, and no amount of software can prevent that.

Sure, downloading and running random shit is a concern, but people in that group are a bit of a lost cause. The best solution for that is to harden the OS, prevent running executables through the GUI, or from user folders (I think SELinux could do that), disable sudo on the user account, and only allow installing Flatpaks. The security of Flathub may not be perfect, but it's a smaller attack surface than the whole internet.

But even if you do that, an Indian call center scam is still going to manipulate your grandma into buying Amazon gift cards, so... It's a lost cause.

A rust rewrite of these tools has a lot of potential commercial value, and I can totally see a cloud provider like AWS putting this into some "hardened cloud AI distro" or whatever. They'll be able to do exactly what they did to Elastic Search, or do the EEE thing and add bugfixes/features that they don't contribute back in order to make their offering more competitive, make minor changes to the CLI as a lock-in strategy, etc.

Not licensing this as GPL will inevitably lead to the erosion of freedoms for everyone.

I installed Opera and used it exclusively.

Why do people use Opera? It's a proprietary Chrome fork owned by a Chinese company.

This is actually kind of interesting. This gamble is very likely to fail, EA could finally die, and its valuable IP sold off to companies that would actually make better use of them.

The only wrinkle in this is that Trump's son in law owns EA now, so if it does end up failing, they'll probably find a way to get US tax payers to bail them out.

This is stupid fear mongering, and the same shit we saw with Google Glass back in the day. Recording people without their consent is easier to do with your phone, and the video will be higher quality. If anything, what makes these glasses seem scarier from a privacy POV is that they're harder to be discrete with than a phone because they're on your face (regardless of the LED)... Which ironically makes them more privacy friendly.

Don't get me wrong, nobody should buy this crap, and it is not privacy friendly at all. Every single sensor/camera on that shit will be uploading data straight into Mark Zuckerberg's veins 24/7. You are stupid if you buy one, simple as that.

But this type of fear mongering is also stupid, and nothing more than click bait. If you want to raise the privacy alarm, focus on the important part: Meta.

I'm a simple man with simple tastes. Saltine crackers with mayo are a comfort food for me.

I'm pretty sure that's all tongue-in-cheek. Giving people the benefit of the doubt is a good default setting.

I'm a programmer with pretty bad astigmatism, and didn't go to an eye doctor until my late twenties. I had never worn glasses before that, and had no idea how fucked my vision was.

Yet, I still have no problem writing code in dark mode without glasses. Even though the text is blurry, I've gotten used to it. I squint a lot, and idk if there are any negative consequences from doing that, but glasses tend to tire out my eyes faster, so I sometimes prefer the blurriness.

Lol I had the same procedure and sat in my car after calling someone to come pick me up, but they took too long and I decided to just drive myself anyways. I couldn't read signs, but traffic lights and other cars were visible enough. I bet there are a lot of old people on the road driving around regularly with eyesight that bad or worse.

They actually sell polarized glasses for this purpose. I know because my eye doctor recommended it, but I went with regular glasses because clear vision is for the weak.

Higher level package managers like yum and dnf/dnf5 have implemented their own enforcing signature modes, enabled by default since the beginning of Fedora. This change brings the RPM side default behavior to this millenium.

So it seems it only applies to manually installing RPMs, but I think most people probably use dnf or yum to install packages