

Things like the MS-PL strike me as Open Source but not Free Software, but I can’t think of a contrary example which is Free Software but not Open Source.
Things like the MS-PL strike me as Open Source but not Free Software, but I can’t think of a contrary example which is Free Software but not Open Source.
There is a mythical “Sony fan” customer who pays extra for their video game consoles, and justified that by believing it comes with a right to be special and awesome and play games no one else is allowed to.
It’s a pantomine of a Nintendo fan, who pays for an underpowered console for first-party games that use unique controllers. None of whom would ever complain if their games were sold on PC so long as they could bring the controller over.
AFAIK, the only real people who want exclusives on PlayStation are Sony employees and shareholders.
The idea that a pedestrian walking anywhere but on a limited access highway would ever be at fault for a collision with an automobile is a direct result of century-old propaganda by the moral equivalent of the NRA.
If i made a self-propelled battering ram with remote controlled steering I would rightly be held to strict liabily if anyone was hurt. But if we put a a chair in the same thing and call it a “vehicle”, suddenly the rules change in our favor.
I like cars and driving, and can easily imagine a number of mitigating circumstances that would shift liability away from the driver, but the presumption that once-walkable city streets are for cars is the result of fierce industrial lobbying and not a reasoned public policy process.
Is this moron still involved in any way?
Was he ever?
(Apropos reminder that Musk has nothing to do with Tesla staring; he just showed up with his PayPal golden parachute, picked “founder” as the title he wanted, and they proceeded to success largely in spite of anything he actually did.)