![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
It doesn’t necessarily mean that. It could also be that they attempt to block the rise of new platforms, and by doing so limiting the amount of platforms that they have to compromise.
It doesn’t necessarily mean that. It could also be that they attempt to block the rise of new platforms, and by doing so limiting the amount of platforms that they have to compromise.
I think technically what they sell is services related to RHEL and not it itself (correct me if I’m wrong).
To me at least, a big problem with it is the hypocrisy. RHEL started itself by repackaging another piece of software. Why is it not OK for others to do the same to them? Especially when the gpl license allows that, and requires them to allow that!
The Linux license allows anyone to distribute it for profit (under certain conditions). If I wanted to sell CDs with the Linux kernel I could. Wouldn’t be a good business, but I could.
Their user base is both the problem and the value they provide. The problem can be mitigated if they don’t join as just one massive instance. They need to be federated within themselves as well.
Where’s the docstring?
Wdym? Are devs not functional?
Twitter’s rate limit changes have led to the death of third-party apps like Apollo
Apollo?
Twitter implemented a rate limit to manage their infrastructure migration to Raspberry Pi
Raspberry pi?
Elon Musk is supposedly fighting against the CIA and NSA, who are using Twitter for censorship
Wha…?
I believe he was comparing it to a similar broadband grant in a comidic fashion