I find it very, very problematic to do some diagnose throughout the "network". But as you mentioned my quote here, I think I explain it a bit nearer and more, because it is not about conspiracy, it is a generic warning. And because of this I write all the time about ignorance. I clearly don't believe in any "evil" plan or something like that. It is most and normally likewise our own ignorance bringing the bad mixing puzzle.
One example is the change of paradigm within hosting server-solutions: People think nowadays that there are even "serverless environments", which is pure wrong. There are for sure server-solutions, but hosted elsewhere most than within container-solutions and they are nevertheless vulnerable depending on the used software. That's a pure minor but nevertheless severe part of ignorance. And there is also more when we look back into history as people always telling themself "It won't be that bad" when authoritarian and fascist politicians are on the rise. That's also ignorance, but that kind severe that all is possible to fall apart. This all means we fight ignorance, not humans. We argument against ignorance and hatred, not against existance. I don't see there within any kind of conspiracy, just the normal reasonable way. But ignoring is surely the wrong way and telling to oneself "It won't be that bad" is also a merely and kind meant lie to go on with ignorance, while beings are already transported away or are discriminated. And I would also recommend that being too paranoid about all and everything to be seen as harmful way. Deeds are counting: Not all files are right away harmful and most the time an image-file is just an image-file. The source where the file is coming from is important, ignorance is for sure harmful and we should just bring up why we reject ignorance alone.
So the sentence is mostly a political meant statement, a warning to look close enough and think of possible the bad outcome. There is difference of what is meant within: Software / Hardware? Political ideals? Free and libre culture was, is and will be always political and it can't exist without its generic meant questions, including the way to transport information and give back the control in the hands of users.
Let us think a bit longer about possible outcome if others can decide what we are able to see and learn: With this selection it is going to get a problem, not because some people think others are "too sensible". That's nonsense, also to speak about "cancelling something / someone". But let's give this kind of thought for removals in the hands of a company thinking to do that "for the better": Also here is no "evil plan", just the thought of profit. But the outcome is not going to be "better" because there is something going to vanish, the possibility of choice is the first and more is to come. There are uncountable works around as series, movies, books and radioplays warning us, we just need to listen close enough. Some surely drive the "evil masterplan" again as part of their tale, others like Aldous Huxleys "Brave New World" do it different - yes, recommendation to read it.
Our future will most likely not be easy, mostly because of improbably large companies and sheer lobbying.
However, that does not mean that we are helpless in the face of it, but simply the opposite. Because every positive little thing can push a knocking dystopia a few steps backwards. That's the way this sentence is meant and that's why projects like Hyperbola are there! So I don't know who said that "bash" is probably bloatware (not even knowing in which category), but I also think we should never stop to look close enough. But we should also stop using comparisons for sure and also we are not within an endless fight (that is also not part of the sentence quoted). We are just doing what we do, because of different motivations. And I would recommend everybody not to search any kind of social solution within the "internet" alone. Go outside and look around, our world is so beautiful and so we have the duty to protect every piece of this beautiful ecosystem around us as to protect every being breathing and living. Combining this with the idea of free and libre culture (software and hardware) makes the decision clear and the sentence also.
The GNU-project itself is a fine idea, marked as the idea. But some of its further parts are nevertheless a problem: Either too many options or too less, ignorance as marked included. And we can rely on direct answers where project-maintainers think there cannot be a situation without Java and / or C#, while those languages are not the scope and not free and libre per definition. So there is only the choice to search for alternatives and Hyperbola has done that. The project meant here was and is gettext: Project-members asked exactly if there are build-options possible to exclude Java and C#, an answer was received that those elementary needed exclude options were not there and not scope, so Hyperbola did the obvious conclusion. Question would be: Is GNU harmful? Depending on the personal perspective, nevertheless that's also an example about minor ignorance. The all in all conclusion is that the GNU-project is not granting the full possible support and not all projects of GNU are helpful. Is that a problem? Yeah, for sure. Is this dangerous? I would say the way is a problem, but their decision. Ours to decide different. And here is the circle closing: As long as this is possible, there is emancipation. And as long as we help and support keeping this alive, we keep the dystopian future stepwise away, not only Hyperbola but everyone interested. It's quite too easy stating that all parts of GNU are problematic, it makes the perspective flat-like and that's surely wrong as the problem is quite different scaled. To draw the line also here: We have found a generic hostile reaction towards our project and some people seem to have a problem with Hyperbola's way of handling things. That's also part of the whole picture, not the most common one but nevertheless it is and was part as people make it easy for themself to not accept Hyperbola as individual and independent project, only to be seen as some kind of alternative "Parabola" - which we are absolutely not, and been never before.
Conclusion: I'm not okay with stating that someone has psychosis disorder throughout the "internet" and I'm also not okay to see that the "fate of the world is lying on Hyperbola". Nobody stated that from my perspective. But I'm also not okay that people want to define what "normality" should be alike. Such discussions and threads are not helpful from my opinion. They tend to go in the wrong direction, mixing different perspectives. You have used "psychosis" and "ungratitude" within the same context. No one here is not "grateful" towards anything, but I don't see us in the position also to be "grateful" if we are treated with hostility just because we hold up the mirror.
To diagnose a psychosis to someone or warning about that is a severe point drawn we should be very cautious about that and most reasonable stop doing that as we have for sure not all information about why someone is reacting on this or that way. And that's also my answer about possible nightmares: Please don't go that kind of deep, just stay cautious and critical which should be enough. When people tell you about being a "ghost" you know that this is enough as your are not that kind of transparent. Treat yourself and your data as everyone's data with respect and care. Just because people are holding up mirrors for situations or social issues, does not mean they want to attack all and everyone. But it is one poor conclusion we can draw that in our times change is hard and before many people accept something they even go for the ones holding just the mirrors for criticism. That's all to be seen nowadays and this makes the people holding the mirrors surely bitter tasting, giving up or going even more radicale. Personal stating: I tend for the bitterness, not for the rest. And I just think we should always remind ourself that paranoia can get out of hands, so I find it important that we bring self-reflection on a daily base into. Otherwise we can watch surely many examples where this goes out of hands and people are left in a dark place with darkest thoughts. As said: Our future is complicated and our reality is complex, but this does not mean we have to give into and this is that reasoning for a simple system where the call for newest parts is not the important point but stability is the major perspective. But it is also important that we can only help where help is wanted: If Hyperbola is treated bad likewise from individuals or others, we cannot help or collaborate as we like to and we just stay open here for the decision coming back for a talk in time perhaps ... as we can only come with democratic and friendly decisions, as we all handle with empathy and solidarity, strict sometimes for sure but oriented for friendly principles towards technical emancipation.
Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!
Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!