Is it really that bad? I won’t have a good connection to download and try it for a few days, but I saw a couple of videos about it some time ago and seemed interesting…

Reading the comments I get the impression that most people didn’t actually read the article, which says that a woman was barely touched and not injured by a self-driving car while crossing the street with a red light.

There barely is “news” here, as the car correctly halted as soon as possible after noticing the pedestrian unforeseeable move, so let alone sides to take.

I am perfectly aware that self-driving technology still has numerous problems corroborated by the incidents reported from time to time, but if anything this article seems a proof that these cars will at least not crush to death the first pedestrian that does a funky move.

Related XKCD: https://xkcd.com/806/

Strange. The other day I had a call on Teams with a customer and had no problems using Firefox 117.0 on NixOS, but I recall that some months ago some features (like microphone and screensharing) where unavailable.

Maybe Microsoft hasn’t rolled out the update in your region/org?

This argument reminds me of the Tolerance Paradox described by Karl Popper, who stated that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

In the licensing context, yes, the Apache and Expat licenses may grant your users the freedom to create proprietary software out of your works, but at the cost of sacrificing all the basic freedoms of all the users that will use the derived non-free product.

So, like Popper said that you should prefer removing the “smaller” freedom for a society of being intolerant in order to guarantee the “greater” one of remaining tolerant in the future, since you still have to choose which freedoms you are going to negate, it’s preferable to use copyleft and impede the “smaller” freedom of creating proprietary software than not using it and allowing the crushing of future users’ fundamental rights.

Wasn’t the Affero GPL (AGPL) created exactely to enforce copyleft in a SaaS environment?

Quoting from the GNU website:

[The AGPL] has one added requirement: if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.