Just because it's a for-profit operation doesn't mean they're wrong, though.
IMO Being open to the idea that multiple valid perspectives can exist simultaneously, is a much more reasoned and intelligent position than "I don’t give a shit what either of them said."
I (don't) like how this comment completely dismisses and bulldozes through everything Karimov said, which was brilliant by the way, and is a sentiment sorely missing from the majority of comments in all this drama.
Open source isn't counterculture anymore, sorry but it has gotten too big to fit in your backpocket.
I understand you disagree with some of the people using and writing it now... but if that's the case, perhaps communities using a different kind of license would be better suited for you if you cannot get along with them?
I feel like the author is trying to point out some kind of hypocrisy while also feeding into one themselves... if open source was supposed to be for everyone, well, that includes people you don't like. And you're not going to change their opinions any more than they can change yours.
Why? mpv/vlc/etc. can move by individual frames, and can screenshot them, no need to burn GBs worth of space on jpegs you don't need.
At what point is it still open source, if it downloads without your permission a proprietary component that is used to run the software?
Runtime behavior has nothing to do with the license of the code. If all the code is available for you to see, then legally speaking the terms of the license are fulfilled, there's nothing inherently illegal or infringing about downloading freely available software, even if it's proprietary.
I would clone that repo across several different forges as well. For sites hosted in the US (like github), anyone can just email a fake (or real) DMCA 512(h) request to get it taken down immediately, because those are required by law to respond immediately by taking the content down well before there is ever any chance of appealing or fighting the request, fake/legal or not. This is a relatively new approach some very angry keyboard warriors have been using. It could take months for a fake request to finally get quashed through the court system properly. And fighting any of these takedown requests also forces you to legally doxx yourself in the process.
If they're insecure then there is an easy way to exploit it to root/flash it with a better OS if that wasn't already possible. Not everyone wants to drop $900 on a hunk of plastic.
the linux kernel is used in nuclear missiles
source:
Conversely... if it's so benign, why should it have a label?
The government is not treating any and all representations of "antifascism" as terrorism now, they are targeting this one single website because there is evidence that they knowingly provide services to some existing groups that were already deemed terrorists.
If there's any debate about whether or not those groups should have been deemed terrorists in the first place, that's a different issue altogether as far as enforcing the law is concerned.
So yeah, antifascism is now terrorism according to the US gov.
I think if you dig a little deeper you will find the issue is not quite so black-and-white.
Will these still be considered "criminal phones" by the governments that already make that claim against GrapheneOS users?