LucifarGundam @lucifargundam@qoto.org

@23n27
Should say
"Free to a good home"

@skyblond
>> Well, today I'm a little bit in the debate mood, mixed with some idealism. So I'm sorry if my opinions annoyed you :)
<< Not at all, I wasn't annoyed. I was only trying to elaborate on the situation.

>>Generally speaking, I think Linux kernel is an international project, and is advertised like that several times in the past. In this case, if the government law doesn't align with the project's principle, then IMO it should move to another country. Just like the RISC-V International Association.
<< I agree, however it seems like certain groups and individuals have made it a lot more difficult to do that in this case. That is regrettable.

>> But in practice, I think both Linux Foundation and Linus Torvalds don't bother with such things. Especially Linus Torvalds, judged on his past behaviour.
<< Although neither party are particularly political, their operating environments(both working in the US) currently impose this- and the cost to quickly relocate in reaction to this is not something either part would like to consider. Both have roots too deep into US soil to quickly relocate. That would take a lot of time and effort.

@nyx
Don't have to with all the voices in your head.

@skyblond

So, from what I heard other Linux community members say about this is that- the foundation of the kernel distribution and development is hosted in the US and is thus governed by US law.

In order for it to be free of US law, the project and it's leads would have to be geographically independent or distributed.

Although the community is global, the core(eg. Torvalds, Greg Hartman, LinuxFoundation,RedHat,Canonical,etc) is still US-based.

@wolf480pl @izaya
Can't you also skip to voicemail with certain providers?

@icedquinn
I'd like a shot at valve, but got a harsh rejection email instead.

@icedquinn
Wow, how trashy

@freeschool

Your message eludes me. Error 400

@TheOldGuy
Take care