I should probably add: if it becomes proprietary, the remaining soft fork will likely die. Turns out very few people have the technical knowledge for Audacity.

If you want to read the telemetry controversy/drama, I found this one I’d read years ago: https://github.com/audacity/audacity/pull/835

I remember feeling a bit bad for the maintainers. There’s a lot of complaining for a minor and optional change, but at the same time it’s interesting that they added telemetry anyway. (Not unmodified however)

As far as I remember, Audacity’s maintainers, previously just some volunteers with no organisation, decided to sell the ownership of the project to a company with some guitar platform. Nothing changed at first, they employed the maintainers to work on the same project they were already working on.

Then they started adding controversial telemetry and some soft forks appeared. I vaguely also remember hearing that there’s some contract that the company owns the source code, so relicensing to a proprietary licence is easy and possible in future. All the new software the company launches is proprietary, and there’s signs they want to tie it all together into a single suite.

Nothing majorly bad has happened to Audacity, yet. But decisions are no longer community driven, as shown by the telemetry drama. I fear it’s a matter of time.

What stops those open source projects having that same rugpull? AOSP was open source and for a long time could be installed on one’s phone indefinitely.

You could argue ownership, but if Audacity can be bought then so can nearly anything.

I remember being a big fan of FLIF when it came out. I remember it had come out of nowhere to steal PNG’s crown, and then the author suddenly disappeared before finishing it. I soon learned they had been picked up by a company to work on a successor named FUIF and then some time after that FUIF was merged into JPEG XL.

Because of this, I was really excited when JPEG XL came out. An obscure but brilliant format had essentially been merged into the successor to JPEG, and I thought it was really going to take off. It had support from many major tech companies including Google. Browsers quickly started adding experimental support and then… nothing.

Soon after JPEG XL was finalised, AVIF was too, and AVIF was essentially Google’s attempt at making a successor to WebP, by using much the same technology as AV1. So the question was, which one to support? Google made a comparison between image formats, focusing almost exclusively on lossy compression ratios (which I think isn’t entirely fair, considering they both have a lossless mode to compete with PNG) and AVIF won. So they dropped JPEG XL from Chromium, claiming lack of interest or something (which was wild, I’d never heard of a faster uptake of an image format). Soon after, Firefox was talking about removing it too, but ended up deciding to wait and see.

Things looked bleak until Apple picked it up, and then things have just stalled since. I’m happy there’s still interest in JPEG XL, its FLIF/FUIF derived lossless encoding produces smaller files than both AVIF’s lossless encoding and PNG, while having features neither could dream of.

As much as it’s dumb, many other places (such as Australia, where I live) are similar at this point.

If you want something not Google, I used to have Ubuntu Touch on a Fairphone before Australia’s 3G network was switched off. It would have to be an older Fairphone however.

I suppose you’re right. They’d been shifting for a long time.

True, although I believe things only got so bad after the party elite had became isolated from their base, and the above is how they initially became isolated from them in the first place.

From what I remember, they repeatedly voted against anything left of what they considered centre in the primaries because they followed the theory that only centrists (or those as close to the other party as possible) win elections, by swaying swing voters in the middle. The other party had long abandoned the idea by this point however, because chasing what they considered centre often meant upsetting those finding themselves outside of that centre.

If the people voting in the primaries were more representative of those outside views, perhaps there could have been another outcome. However, not many of those people vote in primaries.

It’s good, I would have thought the same if I were to stumble on it now. Somebody must have provided an extremely quick downvote, because I hadn’t downvoted you

This comment section wasn’t so full or censored when I commented that, and I know the ones I saw before they were censored weren’t saying that.

I feel like you’ve built two straw-men and conflated them together. I haven’t seen anybody arguing either case on the left side of the meme in response to the images depicted (or similar) on the right side of the meme. People wanting to send weapons to Ukraine generally tend to also say it doesn’t have a Nazi problem (and may compare Russia with Nazis), and people wanting pacifism in Palestine also don’t like weapons and support sent to Israel.