A legal clause that says a US corporation does not have to hold to laws passed by the US government? Good luck with that.

I still use VirtualBox but a version built to work with KVM.

https://github.com/cyberus-technology/virtualbox-kvm

It does not need a kernel module or DKMS because it uses KVM.

Oracle is accused though.

You don’t have to spin it as a business to say that evolving it to reflect reality makes sense. It is not exactly radical to say everybody should get the same level of service that the majority of us get today.

Fewer than 25% of Canadians have door to door delivery. Almost everybody gets delivery to a private mailbox very close to their house. Door to door delivery is down to under 4 million addresses. This is a 10 year plan to finish that transition. Not exactly aggressive.

You can still get delivery to your door if you are disabled.

Regardless of if it is a a business or an essential service, we should be honest about it. We used to send 5 times as much mail when we were fewer people. Why do we have to ignore that?

If 75% of us (like me) are totally fine with super mailboxes, I think the rest can handle it. I know that I could get away with delivery 3 times a week as well. In 2030, how time sensitive is something coming through regular mail. Let’s be real. I could wait one more day.

There is not hypervisor. So, no hypervisor to update.

I would have gone with GrubCraft but awesome otherwise.

Unless they share it against the license terms via copilot of course.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

Permissive licenses are trending in popularity vs copyleft. As a “newer” ecosystem, the Rest-dev culture skews towards permissive.

Why are permissive licenses popular?

Most Open Source software is written by companies.

“Permissive” licenses offer more flexibility and compatibility while minimizing future legal complications. You can replace the word flexibility with the word freedom if you wish. By compatibility, I mean it can be combined with code using other licenses. So no “we cannot combine ZFS and Linux” type problems.

MIT offers the absolute minimum of legal footprint and maximum compatibility.

The above are attributes companies value.

On the other side of the “freedom” front, licenses like MIT guarantee all of the “4 freedoms” that groups like the Free Software Foundation talks about with adding an restrictions on the freedoms of others.

So, why doesn’t everybody use MIT? The patent guarantees in Apache 2.0 are useful if you are ok with the added complexity (still permissive but more legalese).

No.

Microsoft maintains what is essentially the “real” version of Mono within their official .NET project. It is up to version 8.

The version of Mono represents by “The Mono Project” still targets .NET Framework ( stuck on version 4.x for years now ). Microsoft does not care about the real version, nevermind the Open Source replica.

What Microsoft is “donating” is pure legacy. It is a good fit for Wine though.

You are completely correct. The good news is that the “official” .NET is Open Source now and far better than the “Mono Project” ever was.

Linux being more popular means more applications of higher quality. I guess this does not matter to you. For those of us that would prefer more high-quality applications, Linux popularity matters.

The answer is no doubt long, complicated, and not nearly as easy to avoid as you are imagining. Let’s not compound his problems.

GPT would offer excellent English and perhaps some nice formatting in at least twice as many words.