> Also wild how this post is singling out Safari when Android seems to somehow be even worse
My guess is that it is selection bias. Older people are probably more like to use iOS devices, since they are marketed as being simple to use and maintain. So, they don't hear too many complaints about Chrome on Android, even though it's worse.
Edge shares literally every single website you visit with Microsoft, even in InPrivate (= Incognito) mode. [1] The worst part is that you have to disable a genuine security feature (i.e., SmartScreen) to prevent this. No other browser makes you choose between security and privacy in this manner. Even Chrome attempts to protect your privacy by doing hash prefix computations for their Safe Browsing feature.
Also, at least Chrome lets you set a custom encryption passphrase. Microsoft managed to import every other feature from Chrome, except this one, apparently.
Microsoft has somehow done the impossible and beat Google in its own game. Edge is a complete privacy nightmare, only rivaled by the likes of Opera and Yandex browsers. If Chrome is the fire, Edge is a nuclear reactor in meltdown.
This fully coincides with my experience. Every once in a while, I hear about how much DDG has improved and how its results are now better than Google. I switch to DDG for a few days, get fed up with the (low) quality of the results, eventually start adding !g to all my queries because I _anticipate_ the results to be terrible, and at some point, I switch back to Google. Every single time I try DDG, this happens. Without exception.
I know not everyone shares my viewpoint but I wish people on reddit and HN would stop hyping up DDG. It will likely never be real competitor to Google. I don't mean to blame them in any way. Even Microsoft, with all their might, still fails to match Google's capabilities.
> BSD peoples like the BSD2/MIT/ISC/FreeBSD-License, but have no problem too import the CDDL the Apache or the GPLx (at least in the pkg), whatever works.
If by "BSD peoples" you mean the FreeBSD/NetBSD community, then yes. But OpenBSD devs deem CDDL to be unacceptable:
Turkey has spent more than $30 billion on refugees and was already host to 2 million refugees in 2015 (i.e. before the deal) [1]. So, no, that deal hasn't brought any meaningful change.
Japan is not really doing OK. They are literally going extinct, have an awful and destructive work culture and have a ton of problems with sexism, to the point where it is necessary to have gender-segregated train carriages to stop groping. The only reason Japan seems to be doing OK is because their news are mostly inaccessible to the rest of the world.
> It’s trifling for Europe as a whole, as shown by the fact that Turkey managed to process them alone.
Considering the fact that 1 million refugees were enough to revitalize Neo-Nazi parties and cause a wave of right-wing terrorism and political assassinations, no, it is not trifling for Europe. I think some of you forget/don't realize how dire the situation was before the 2016 EU-Turkey refugee agreement. 5m would likely lead to the collapse of the EU.
> Right, so the correct conclusion is to never use
It depends on how you "use" GPL'd software. You _can_ run proprietary software on Linux. Clearly, using GPL'd and proprietary software together is legally possible.
> never contribute to
If simply contributing to projects licensed under GPL were such a huge problem, we would have industry-wide blacklists for employment. Contributing to _some_ projects can be a problem for _some_ positions but generally you are in the clear.
> never write GPL-licensed software
You, as the author, have the right to relicense code you have written yourself. GPL'ing your own code doesn't increase your legal risks.
So no, the correct conclusion is not "to never use, never contribute to and never write GPL-licensed software" and the best solution is not to "completely rid ourselves of GPL". I'm not even sure what the problem you are trying to solve is. People can and do profit off GPL'd code. It is not an instant death sentence like you seem to imply.
> Treating users like children, not listening to users, rolling releases without regard to stability or consistency, adding features nobody asked for instead of fixing bugs, inconsistent UIs...
None of these are unique to open source. IMHO, commercial software tends to be equally bad, if not worse.