They saw several quarters of rapid growth spread out over a decade, give or take. The arguments of "all hype" were throughout to the point of lawsuits.
I guess enough AI "hype" translated in to "AI inside this" sales so everyone's happy?

Really, "not locking your door" is a reasonable example since depending on what occurred due to the unlocked state the person who left the door unlocked can be charged with a crime in some cases. Now calling a community weak and exploiting it to the point of harm? You let them in but the intent to do harm was already there.

"Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope......"
Quoted from the GPL 2.0 document.
And it does mention the "program" to be under license witch itself can be sold, then specifies "files" as the object that is protected which can be changed then redistributed.

I have always seen the GPL as a license requiring any changes to published code be documented and not much else. So there's the public code then the use, the application which needs its own licensing. Notice that GPL has very little specifics on what an application might be.

There is nothing in the the GPL 2.0 licensing, the linux kernel, that says you have to publicly redistribute your code i think? So can I pay the subscription and use that source code as a reference to patch and distribute my own patched kernel?

not allowing higher level languages to request/map memory oblivious to the kernel language's memory management?

ive been watching Sonny Rollins videos lately. I don't watch much else like clips, disses, call outs, reviews ...... I just like to see what current distractions people are addicted to.

my question is how do you standardize digital identity then I will say as well standardize authentication , while limiting government access to that data? im asking this while assuming that corporate control of those systems is not working.

And Vulcan is still around. I'm right now remembering the discussions that vulcan would die off.

ok, if the teddybear eyes were not made in one country the fur made in another the stuffing made in another the packaging made in another then all assembled in yet another.....it would cost 20 times more.. because we can't afford to pay workers to do so..... we would need to find an alternative to the teddybear. like a block of wood or an old sock. do you understand that.....?

and then you are taking about a workforce of about 100 workers of " affluence" per 100,000 workers in general who expect to keep their jobs where they engineer as many of the 100,000 out of work as possible due to their redundant obsolescence ......

honestly if we here in the US had to produce all of the components of our economic outout ourselves then assemble it entirely ourselves we would likely just do without much of it since at that point it would cost at least 5 or 10 times more to do so and as much as 20 times more.....

by trying to access a paged memory range that did not exist.....

so yet another level of virtual irq's?

it was a long time ago. but the same issue of bug reports lacking context was especially bad. so its was suggested that some proof of a submitter's lab environment be attached somewhere. a unicode based or binary based config file for easy sharing was even suggested.