I could go on for days about the problems with medical devices. I write software for one of those at my day job and as much as our team would love to port the software to something other than Windows, that would be a logistical nightmare.
The thunderbolt connection alone can break because of a thousand factors, even on the exact combination of hardware and operating system it was tested with. Processing of medical images is often very GPU-heavy which gives us the same problems as with CAD software.
Even if you get all the technical problems out of the way, medical devices need to be certified before you're allowed to use them for diagnostics. This often includes an exact specification of the platform you run the software on. If you just take something that's certified for "Windows 10 between 20H2 and 22H2, Intel or AMD CPU, device driver version 8.1.23" and try to run it on Wine, I would expect the American FDA, German TΓV and Chinese NMPA to fight over who gets to kick your door in first. It might be possible to get a certification for a Linux version but probably only for one specific combination of distribution, display server and desktop environment.
Linux is great for some use cases and at least decent for most others but what I've experienced in some Linux communities made me understand why people don't feel welcome. In a thread literally titled "Help me like desktop Linux" that listed a few things I was struggling with, I got hit with a bunch of "you're an idiot for not using the exact same distro that I like", "works on my machine" and "you want the wrong things". Even as someone who already had over a decade of Linux server experience, that almost made me turn around and walk away.
Every bad thing about commercial software is the programmers' fault. Even if it was something that management decided and the programmer fought against it and lost. They claimed you should rather risk losing your job than accepting an inconvenience for your user. Weird take but okay. Then they started comparing software engineers to soldiers "just following orders" during the holocaust. That's where I blocked them. Cherry on top: they have "if you want to hire me as a software engineer, message me" in their bio. I wonder why nobody wants to hire them...
That using 100% free and open source software is more important than actually getting your work done.
In a thread about Affinity Photo where someone insisted that we should all use gimp and just not edit photos if gimp doesn't have the features we need rather than asking Serif to port their software to Linux.
Also in several threads about migrating from Windows to Linux where every missing or complicated feature was brushed away with "just get used to not being able to do it, even if it's critical to your workflow".
And at the same time, you rephrase it to imply something that was nowhere in the original sentence.
"Don't make me ban you" doesn't necessarily mean "Don't say anything I don't like" but maybe just "Don't post anything illegal" or "Don't make the experience worse for everyone else". I fully agree that the original phrasing is too vague which is why I've provided a whole list of more specific suggestions.
You are the one who brought up censoring. The person you replied to just said "consequences". Others not liking you and not wanting to talk to you anymore is a consequence.
Your comments in this thread sound a lot like you not wanting us to say anything you dislike. I respect your opinions and I would fight for you being allowed to share them. I just think they're wrong and disingenuous.
As an abstract concept and a logical conclusion, I would say it's neither good or bad.
What is bad is when people interpret free speech as being allowed to hurt others without consequences. And in my personal opinion, most people who criticize a lack of free speech fall directly into that category.
If you're allowed to say everything, then as a logical consequence I'm also allowed to say everything. Including "You are wrong, you are rude, I don't like you and I never want to talk to you again. Please leave."
Note, this is just an example. I don't really want you to leave. Yet.
Free speech means that you can not be punished by law for your opinions. It explicitly does not mean that others are required to listen to you or even like your opinions. Just as you are allowed to hold a controversial opinion, they are allowed to disagree with you, argue with you, walk away or show you the door if you're in their house/community/instance.
Some inspiration for what to include/how to phrase the rules:
"Be nice to each other"
"You are allowed to share your opinion. Others are not required to like it"
"Accept that others might have different opinions from yours, just as you would want them to accept that your opinions are different from theirs"
"Moderation is based on how you say things, not what you say"
"Free speech has legal limits in most jurisdictions. The instance owner may be forced to remove illegal content even if they agree with you." (for example, saying that all billionaires should be killed may or may not be a valid opinion but it may be considered incitement and depending on where you live, instance admins can get in trouble for not deleting it)
Please rewrite this or at least add a tl;dr and change the thread title to something more descriptive. I'm sure you have a great idea somewhere in there but I've had to stop reading after a couple of paragraphs that just sounded preachy and got nowhere.
Foreign dubs are basically whole movies lipsynced from start to finish and that happens all the time.