You are not getting me annoyed!
I just want to give the reasoning that there is the possibility for correction. Meaning: An inclusive language at a point is better to give a some hand. Not to forget that it had to hard enough with values and principles. We are discussing and that's a very good thing, we don't have to follow the absolute same opinion. I'm just onto that one point as recommendation: Don't be that hard onto the circumstances and in this way I try to give the reasnong that more or less we humans are the problem and the solution itself for this problem.
As long as enough of us are onto the search for selfish actions those things are going to happen even more. Perhaps the first years of free software were more about researching functional ways and the whole situation was quite different. But nowadays we have also groups and companies having their roots within those early developments. A company is the pure selfishness: With that in mind some very important projects are either on the risk of being driven in wrong directions or being moved through additions like the Linux-kernel. OpenBSD for example has some different points but nevertheless in the end the same problems. It is only not that visible because of the permissive licensing itself.
Free soft- / hardware and culture is in the roots not compatible with capitalism as it is based onto altruistic ideas. "Open-Source" was the tryout to make it a bit less more visible. It has failed doing that and brought up even more problems as that was clear right on the beginning. The generic point for example that "not for commercial" should be "unfree" is a bit sarcastic. Yes, in one way understandable. But on the other it is the same already mentioned: Altruism and selfishness are not compatible. Free culture and more is meant about working together from the generic thought, from the interest to move something forward. When only handle from selfish points there can be also movement, but this depends if people learn that there are more perspectives. Regarding the Linux-kernel for example: Sorry, but the learning is over for now - with also having hope for more like HyperbolaBSD.
Well, if a company becomes corporate enough, definitely, I would agree...
But yeah, honestly, I am not saying commercial is always bad, I am saying, the potential for bad is more likely...
As for OpenBSD, the permissive licensing as far as I know does make a difference, it doesn't fix the problem, which is absolutely true.
However, it does mitigate some of it I have noticed, because corporations don't feel like they need to screw anything up to make it non-free or bloated for their "uses" Small EDIT:
By that I mean, the copyleft licenses tend to make corporate people more likely to find a different opening if they want to use said product for their other purposes, which usually are corporate which tends to be more likely to be bad, in this case.
It probably happens still to BSD, but I think it reduces a corporations desire to feel the need to screw stuff up.
As for GNU and/or linux kernel as a whole, regardless, I do wonder what differences between the way both work will occur...
I assume, OpenBSD doesn't use bash for sure and possibly there are other things I have yet to find out.
I am sure more or less, it will be an interesting implementation.
I also think depending on how it is done, it could use anywhere, from...
25%-75% as much battery life as GNU/Linux
Not quite sure at this time, but I think it will use less.
The question however that is really up in the air, for me, is also speed.
Also, Hyperbola does have a different focus, so it makes me wonder about what will be different from OpenBSD vs HyperbolaBSD as well as HyperbolaBSD vs Hyperbola GNU/Linux-Libre
I look forward to seeing how this works.
Btw, not that this will be done right away and possibly ever, unless someone has a weird idea of doing things differently...
I hope at some point, its possible to have 3 FDE + /Boot installations on system
And when you boot into the main system, you can choose one of three installations. to login from.
Aka, above whatever bios you have, you have the utter root, then three different small roots attached to it, each, you can login from, the utter root, would have a password, of course.
The next three small roots could have, their own as well, or decline, then the user login, which I think you already know...
This is probably a bad idea for HyperbolaBSD itself, but it could be a good idea for a Hyperbola libre BIOS!
Just a thought, if you have interest, or anyone here for that matter...
HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!