Their display server is Mir. They first chose Wayland. Everyone was excited and started putting their weight behind it. Then their NIH syndrome kicked in and they declared Mir, claiming that Wayland has a lot of deficiencies. Wayland devs contested it and explained why their complaints were wrong. But Canonical never bothered to reply. This irked everyone else and they stayed with Wayland. Eventually, Mir failed to achieve its goal and Canonical decided to convert it to just another Wayland compositor.
"India" is not offended. Just the ruling party is. They and their bigoted followers get offended whenever they're called out on their dictatorial attitude. As for the rest of India, what's happening is detrimental to its constitution.
Printers are the text book examples of why device manufacturing shouldn't be left to big companies. You have tracking dots, spyware infestation, subscription for ink/toners, reporting of the cartridge as empty when you still have much left in it, refusal to print when unused color cartridges are empty, intentional bricking if 3rd party cartridges or ink is used, and utterly crappy firmware in general.
Inkjets require precision manufacturing. But assembling it or other types from components should be possible - like how desktops, mechanical keyboards, etc can be. We really need to ditch filthy mass market printers because DIY printers will be much better than anything they offer.
They probably started with the inkjets. More so, considering that inkjets have turned into a money grabbing scam. You're better off with a laser printer if you need only B&W.
Those are only secondary politics in software development. You missed the primary politics of software - the power struggle expressed through code itself. It comes in many forms. But perhaps the most obvious one is the attempt by software corporates to wrestle control and freedom away from the user using DRM, Trusted computing, locked down devices, dark patterns, etc and relegate the user to the status of a renter.
A trillion dollar company demanding 30% cut of revenue of small developers, on top of annual developer fees and exorbitantly priced hardware with zero reparability and severe environmental impact isn't monetarily expensive enough for you? That isn't loyalty. It's stupid fanaticism that harms everyone else. And I don't want to even start about the petty part.
There are videos where Diana herself says that she's isolated in the family and denied her privileges for her attitude and charity work. And when she died, she was deservedly mourned by millions of ordinary people. I have serious doubts whether her own family (the royal ones) mourned her as much. But she is a rare exception among rich people. How many others do you know who showed compassion from her position?
I'm not being antagonistic against Kate. I don't wish for anyone to suffer from Cancer. What I'm saying is that perhaps rich people in general don't deserve sympathy from ordinary people. The sympathy they show is heavily skewed and at times they're just sociopathic in pursuit of wealth.
While I do agree with your sentiment, you've to ask - will the rich show the same concern towards the regular or poor folk?
The chances of your survival are significantly higher if you're affluent. And that's not because the treatments are inherently costly. It's because the big pharma and the medical insurance companies have no concern towards the patients' suffering compared to their profits. The prices they impose are inflated way beyond reasonable returns. It's rigged to ensure only the survival of the rich.
At some point, you've to ask - how much do we forgive before we start considering these people as a threat to the general community?
Remember! The US backed the biggest genocide after the Holocaust - the Bangladesh massacre of 1972, where 30 million people are estimated to have been murdered. The reason was that the Pakistani dictator who instigated the genocide was their ally. And they didn't like Mujib-ur-Rehman, the newly elected East Pakistani (Bangladeshi) leader, because he was a socialist! The US even tried to intervene militarily to help the war criminals, nearly starting a nuclear world war.
Democratic leaders tend to be pro-people. And that makes them US's enemies. The antidemocratic tag that the US has is well-deserved.
People calling for genocide and murder of children are those who are far removed from humanity. They're a nasty burden that the modern society hasn't learned to deal with yet.
If you want to flex your experience, I have twice as much as you do, just with Arch. You are just speaking your perspective and extrapolating it to others. Neither the official Arch sources, nor the regular users' experience match what you say. The argument you made is in complete disregard of the ability, patience or intent of the vast majority of users.
It's a common trope that I see that newbie Linux users complaining about how Arch users talk down to them. I can see where that comes from.
Arch requires significantly more tinkering to keep it working, compared to Debian. That's not because of FUD. Arch has a more hands-on philosophy. It even says so on their wiki.
I have seen savvy users jump directly from Windows to Arch without trying easier distros like Mint. But if given a choice, I wouldn't introduce anyone to Arch as their first distro. Most people are simply not that patient and are likely to give it up as being too hard. They are likely to give in to the actual FUD that Linux is not user-friendly.
It's not unusual for people who have tasted the freedom that Arch gives you, to think that it's the easiest distro around. But the Arch way of doing things is alien to most people around. It's very important to set the expectations straight and not get carried away.
That really isn't true. Debian packages are often heavily patched and tested to make sure it fits into the rest of the ecosystem. While Arch does it too, they prefer to keep the packages as vanilla as possible - often requiring effort of the user's side to make it work with the rest of the system. It's a different philosophy. While Debian tries to be simple by being opinionated, Arch relies heavily on the effort of the users.
We probably never will.