stinerman
the retailer is generally considered oblivious to the situation until proven otherwise they have zero incentive to vet the product.
In fact they are willfully ignorant because selling counterfeit merchandise helps line go up.
Yes and it's likely that they will not be allowed to any longer after Google lost their anti-trust case.
sex-women
Someone who repackages/patches free software has different incentives than upstream. So generally speaking, derivative browsers are more privacy friendly, have better features, etc.
That's not to say that upstream isn't important. It absolutely is! It's just that derivatives are generally better.
There's a guy who works as a product owner at my employer. He has a PharmD. He got fed up with the metrics for how many prescriptions he had to fill. Now he does software.
It's crazy to think that someone has a terminal degree in a really technical field and he nope'd out because of how bad it got.
Glad I could be of service.
Ahh the halcyon days of downloading one song from a private FTP server with upload ratios, found by Lycos FTP search. Over a modem, natch, so it took about 50 minutes...and that's when your mom didn't kick you off the internet so she could make a call.
Sent this to my wife and we talked a bit about how I don't like lights on.
I realized that even when I'm home alone at night (and not taking care so that she doesn't wake up), I will use the flashlight/torch on my cell phone rather than turn on lights in the house.
Of course you can fork it, but you can't call it Mastodon. That's trademarked. Just like how you can fork Firefox but have to call it Waterfox or Iceweasel or Librewolf.
The confusion here is between Mastodon the company and Mastodon the software and instances of the running software. Eugen Rochko owns the first two. He also owns the instances mastodon.social and mastodon.online. Everything else is outside of his control.