They are justifying monetizing their userbase thru ai nobody wants. RIP Mozilla it was good while it lasted

That’s good for them, the tool I have does what I need from it, and since it’s an appimage I don’t have to pay attention to updates. Thanks for the info tho.

Not sure, I moved to one of the forks that pulled out the telemetry and made an appimage available.

For starters, if it’s critical you’ve got to get it away from GitHub…

If your Google workspace is managed by an administrator, you may not have the rights to disable it. Even if you disable it in your account, if the group policy has it turned on it’ll still operate.

If you’re allowed to use Firefox and ublock origin, you can block it at the page level. Scripts can’t run if they don’t load.

’ Please succinctly answer a question of philosophy that has plagued mankind for thousands of years. can’t? <crosses arms with a superior smirk> I win’

Pink eye: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunctivitis#Bacterial

Kids get it, and it’s not fun.

Wish this was an article rather than a video.

Do you know about AppImages? Seems like those meet the need you’re complaining about.

You still have to set the executable flag for them, but you can do that through the graphic user interface. No need to open a terminal.

I’ll edit my comment to clarify, you make a good point.

I’m inferring from these two quotes:

1-Suhy said that he’s unsure why the Free Software Foundation didn’t choose to intervene. “They actually did not want me to appeal,” Suhy explained.

2-“I was willing to work with them. I want to make sure that we protect the license and make sure that there’s no dangerous precedent. And the only thing that they could come up with was not to appeal, which I couldn’t do.”

From the beginning of the article: -“If the appellate court upholds that decision, which endorsed database maker Neo4j’s right to amend the GNU Affero General Public License, version 3, governing the use of its software with new binding terms, current assumptions about the enforceability of copyleft licenses will no longer apply.”

What that says to me is that FSF fears the 9th will use this case to expand corporate power, as they often have in the past, and the precedent thus set will have a much wider reach than a low court decision. This Suhy guy may burn the forest while trying to save his tree.

But, IANAL, YMMV.

The article says It could be that FSF encouraged him to settle because FSF wanted it kept out of the 9th District, to minimize the damage of the ruling. When the 9th rules to uphold the lower ruling it will be a problem.