It does not matter, that's irrelevant to the lawsuit. Google is not being asked to tank its own software. It is only required to provide freedom and informed choice to users, overcoming the anticompetitive advantage it gives itself by not giving users the informed choice to pick their preferred applications store.
That's not avoiding it, that's playing straight into it. That's exactly the best case scenario they drew when they made the decision to block VPN connections. You are giving them your data and allowing them to fingerprint you.
Old reddit still works fine, but I suspect it won't soon enough.
Oh, he has. You are just limiting your view to English-speaking subreddits, while non-English reddit is booming with terrorists.
If you really want to know how these companies would operate their websites, just look at the corners there of regions where they can't or won't be sued, or no press will cover the kind of awful content they allow.
It is not about "bragging" or whatever. Nor is it about "bad" or "good".
By funding or promoting the use of Google products, you would be funding litigation and influence such as lobbying to keep poor regulation as it is, if not worse. You would be funding their acquisitions of great tech and startups that might offer a more ethical and/or free technology. You would be funding their poaching of said engineers and valuable hardware intellectual property.
Simply put, it is a counterproductive and an unsustainable practice.
That being said, their amazing engineers, and technical value of their hardware are irrelevant to this community, post and comment. That simply doesn't excuse their entire business model being built on breaches of privacy and other forms of curbing user freedoms.
Fairphone, Librem, PinePhone, f(x)tec, etc. are available alternatives, yes.
Even a OnePlus is better than directly funding and supporting the adversary organisation that is one of the biggest surveillance capitalism corporations on earth.
I keep seeing this idea everywhere. Buy a Google phone and install another OS.
It is completely absurd to fund the exact adversaries you are running away from, while consuming, without contributing a dime, merely a piece of free software. (It is only a small piece of freedom because none of the hardware is free, and some binary blobs [incl. potential backdoors] will still be present in the alternative OS no matter which one it is.)
This is unsustainable, terrible, damaging advice. Stop giving it.
"Let the votes decide the quality of the content" is capitalist rhetoric that was the start of reddit's end. It is not an argument, it is not a principle to stand behind, and it most definitely is not a better alternative to guidelines the community can vote on.
Not gonna happen, the developer made it quite clear from the get-go. Also, their community are quite hostile against it and pretty much most FOSS stuff for some reason.
I can see a fork taking what is useful about it (UI/UX) and adopting solid backends (federation, proper VoIP with screen sharing, etc.)
...and kids, this is why you (A)GPLv3 your code. Always.
Your public domain assumption doesn't have to apply to others, legally or ideologically.
Data ownership does exist in the Fediverse, in fact it is one of its selling points that you can set up your server and own the data instead of using a surveillance capitalist SaaS that stores, manipulates and imposes legal rights over your data. Applications like Mastodon do send a federation request to other instances to delete data if submitters want to. Additionally, some users put licenses on their profile that might have restrictions (i.e: CC non-commerical, etc.) on what you are legally allowed to do with the data.
So no, accessing the data is not the same as using or processing it for many people, legally too in several parts of the world. Also, "innocuous curiosities" label is entirely subjective.
Do we actually know? We might know that Crowdstrike was the cause but we don't actually know what went wrong and how it happened. It is an unfree proprietary closed source software, we just have to take their word for it, which for all purposes is PR in line with the fact that it is coming from a profit-driven organisation.