...but not legal. Being poor doesn't necessarily mean you're inclined to break the law. Besides, Linux is useful if you perhaps want to later get a job in the tech field.

It says "sysadmins should prioritise patching", but... has it been patched yet?

I agree that Epic Games should have never allowed them in the tournament in the first place. That's a mistake on Epic's part and it does make them seem like they're trying to weasel out of paying prize money.

This is discrimination. But not all discrimination is unjustified. I discriminate against people all the time. I discriminate against unpleasant people when choosing whom I interact with. I discriminate against companies that have a history of doing bad things. Epic discriminates against residents of a country that broke a decades-long peace in Europe. I believe it is justified.

I think a good compromise solution would be to donate the prize money to a humanitarian organisation. That way it doesn't seem like Epic is only doing it because of the money.

The Bernie Sanders meme tenplate is perfect for this

In my opinion, all companies essential to national security should be nationalised. I mean the likes of Lockheed Martin as well. There should be no profit from war and we can't afford companies to chase profits against the interests of national security if we end up needing it.

The ship was not intercepted by the Navy. They served a court order on the company and the company turned the ship back and its cargo was seized

Hitler was only sentenced to 5 years in prison despite being convicted of treason. He lived in comfort and wrote his famous book there.

The 60-day, nine-month, and time-served sentences make a mockery of justice and a tragedy of history. 20 years is about right if not a bit lenient for plotting what would have gotten someone hanged, drawn, and quartered at the time of our country's founding.

More likely a case of "confidently being paid to lie"

I remember my aunt (lawyer) coming up with some insane conspiracy-level solution to this problem:

The Supreme Court has ruled in Allen v. Cooper that Congressional attempts to make US state governments liable for copyright infringement are unconstitutional. In other words, US states can't be sued for copyright infringement under US federal law without their permission. Under standard federal jurisprudence, all subdivisions and departments of a state are considered to be the state they are a part of for the purposes of sovereign immunity. This also applies to organisations that receive most of their funding from and are wholly dependent on state government agencies as well.

The solution would be to have a friend state government either:

• donate a copious amount of money to the Internet Archive to make it "financially dependent" on that state government, or
• in cooperation with the Internet Archive, pass a law that makes the Internet Archive an independent state agency of that government (probably safer in terms of keeping the IA independent)

This would make the IA fully immune from copyright lawsuits because they would benefit from their patron state's sovereign immunity. But it comes at the cost that the patron state has a lot of power over the IA. A considerable trade-off.

"IPv6 is not a feature; its absence is a bug"

• Someone on the Flathub repo, I think

He started putting polls for things like Twitter Blue, other "governance polls", and eventually, on whether he should resign as CEO. He responded to the result of every poll with "vox populi, vox dei" (Latin: The voice of the people is the voice of God) when it went his way, except the poll for him to step down went against him.

He has not stepped down and he stopped doing the polls.