I've never been able to tell the difference between a cheap trackpad and whatever Apple uses, but I hear folks go on about it endlessly.

My guess? Most people don't care, but the discussions are driven by the few who do, because for them, it's a really big deal, and they'll pay accordingly. Similarly for "My code is unreadable unless it's on a 4k display at 220+ PPI" -- I'm sure it's true for them, but for me, a crappy FHD display I can get for $100 is great for coding.

I'm like this with Linux...I pay System76 a premium because I care about how they go about building their systems, both hardware and software. To normal folks, it seems like a crazy thing to pay a premium for, but for me, it's a great deal.

Google just announced Googlebooks, which deeply integrate with Android, even running Android apps from your phone, on your laptop. Both amd64 and arm64 architectures available.

https://9to5google.com/2026/09/21/googlebook-launch/

That's just not true. I updated MacOS on my work machine and Emacs stopped being able to read the filesystem. Any system breaks stuff on upgrade when that stuff isn't in the core testing path for the folks crafting the upgrade.

> Sure, but probably only because they can call you if something happens.

I had my parents on Linux for a hot second, and got tired of them calling me for help. So I switched them to Mac, and then I discovered they still call for help. At least with Linux I knew the system well.

Just my 0.02, but Linux is a smarter choice today than it ever was, because AI is extremely good at fixing things. I can fix most anything on my machines, but I still use AI, because it does it while I'm doing other stuff.

Mmh, reading your comment leaves me a little divided inside.

Are you unaware that they likely want to talk with you, and the technological issues are likely just the vehicle for this?

I suggest you just help them and try to savor the time you have with them. The time is likely a lot shorter then you expect. But of course, just a random bystanders perspective

> Are you unaware that they likely want to talk with you, and the technological issues are likely just the vehicle for this?

Not the person you're responding to, but: They may want to learn to communicate honestly. I would find the situation described deeply irritating. Enough to cut contact for a while, even.

Yes, this is one of the central theses of the TV show "The Good Place". In simpler societies, it's easier to determine what is right and wrong, since actions are often local and can be judged on their immediate effects. But when everything is globalized and there's so many connections, determining right and wrong becomes much more difficult.

> When I was in the US, I did actively attempt to diminish my tax contribution as much as legally possible

I like how this is being spun as virtuous. When multinational trillion-dollar companies do it, we say it's bad!

When multinational trillion-dollar companies do it, it's purely for greed. Tax avoidance for moral reasons is dubious to start with, but at least ostensibly the motivation isn't the same as what drives thieves and muggers.

When Antifa attempts to keep more of its money so that Hindenburg can have less, that's good. When Hitler attempts to keep more of my money so that Hindenburg can have less, that's bad. That's because Hitler is worse than Hindenburg and Hindenburg is worse than Antifa.

Let’s not ignore the fact that multinational trillion-dollar companies will venue shop for the least tax burden to satisfy what we presume is greed, while GP venue shopped for a place to call home where he wouldn’t need to minimize their tax burden because he agreed with the taxes.

This is a massive difference in intent, which is why it’s bad when it’s multinationals.

Right, and businesses need to pay for theirs.

> I find it far more ironic that they are called Reclaim the Internet.

That's the name of the site covering the block.

> money, popularity, increasing adoption

These are the currencies of the VC world, and many open source developers don't release their work for those reasons (myself included, limited though my contributions are). It seems strange to deride them as making the world uninteresting because of this.

They won't do this, because starting out as non-free doesn't get the same traction. Now that I think about it, it's basically a form of enshitification: draw people in with one deal, then after they're onboard, change it to something less favorable.

Why is it enshittification if you only have to pay when you have >$5M in revenue? Is your world so shit if you cross that threshold?

I'm just observing the incentives. There is a reason these licenses have not taken off, especially for nascent projects.

I think the issue is more on how you audit such things. Governments struggle (partially by design, but still) to get proper audits on who uses what and how much money they make.

The theory is great, but I'm unsure how you execute this.

I think the maintainer is still better off if only 50% of companies that should be paying are actually paying. The alternative is to just get nothing.

And if the maintainer wants to, they can always try to go after some of the more egregious offenders.

It isn't about catching every last >5m business out.

It is about having a rule that can be enforced when it is obvious to do so.

Fair enough. I'm in support of it, but it seems like any company >5m is also going to give a big legal fight if and when they are challenged on such aspects.

But I'm all for a good attempt at taking our wealth back either way.

> any company >5m is also going to give a big legal fight

I don't know about any company doing that. I guess some would do so on principle. But I honestly suspect it'd be a cost/risk based decision.

Who knows. But there is seemingly no carrot to entice those with money to give some of it to support the project, so a stick it is.

I like the Blender way of, contribute money = your features requests get some priority. But that only works if the company needs something.

Well, that's even more reason to not complain about it.