Debian?

You can absolutely use Linux without any GNU software. I use Chimera Linux for example (no Glibc, no GCC, no GNU utils). I even get away from some software that Red Hat created according to your definition like SystemD. However, even still, I know that Red Hat is responsible for much of the software I run since I use software like X, Wayland, Mesa, Podman, KVM, PulseAudio, and PipeWire.

It is VERY hard to run a Linux system without using code contributed by Red Hat.

No, Red Hat did not “create” glibc, GCC, or GNOME. They just contributed tens of thousands of lines of code to them. Perhaps more than anybody else over the last 20 years. Ever heard of Ulrich Drepper?

Actually, it is impossible to use Linux without using code contributed by Red Hat as they have been one of the biggest contributors to the Linux kernel itself for multiple decades now.

And to clarify, the Linux kernel is absolutely NOT a GNU project. Very few packages in a typical Linux distro are actually. The full list of GNU packages is here:

https://www.gnu.org/software/software.en.html#allgnupkgs

Compare it with this list:

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/open-source-program-office/contributions

GNU has been influential but is not essential as you can create a complete Linux distribution without any of it (again see Chimera Linux). Code contributed by Red Hat however is totally unavoidable and completely essential. It is not possible to run a Linux system without it. All the distributions you listed heavily rely on code contributed by Red Hat.

To say otherwise is not just misleading. It is wrong.

I do not use any Red Hat distributions. I do benefit from their contributions and am thankful for them.

You sir, may be the highest quality person on the Internet.

We may disagree. One of us may be wrong. Or it may simply be two sides of the coin. Regardless, I respect your opinion and values and cannot begin to express how impressed I am with your response here. I hope someday to achieve the same level of maturity.

We cannot expect companies to be “good” but that is absolutely something we can strive for in ourselves.

I am not sure how you arrived at “none” from your second sentence. The second sentence is exactly my point.

Alternatively then, can I just use the Microsoft source code and claim that I got it from AI? That seems to be your point here.

Both BlackArch and Kali are pen testing distros. I guess they see the natural evolution as one from newb to hacker (ethical or otherwise).

Outside of the default packages, there is not much difference between Kali / BlackArch and their base distros (Debian / Arch).

I had the same impression of Bookworm. Debian including non-free firmware made a big difference. Trixie may be a game changer for Debian on the desktop.

You might consider installing Arch in a Distrobox and adding yay to it to get access to the AUR on your current system. I use a MUSL based distro these days but use Distrobox to bring the AUR with me. This would be a way to give you a feel for the AUR without having to quit your current distro of choice cold turkey.

I have considered trying LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) with a an Arch/Distrobox. That would be a base system of Debian Stable (stable), a reasonably up-to-date but not “bleeding edge” desktop (Mint), and the AUR for up-to-the minute versions of every package I can think of if I want them. Maybe I will try it when LMDE 7 launches. Could be good.

Nah. Arch sits at the table with Ubuntu at this point. It is the domain of gamers and YouTubers. The Edgelords have fled to Void (or even Chimera Linux).

Wicked. What distro works best for them?

I use Edge as my “work” browser. Works well with Teams and Office. Works well with corporate sites. Allows me to be logged in with work accounts. Keeps a work bookmarks separate. I can change the browser agent to say I am on Windows for compatibility. And I am ok if Microsoft spies on my work stuff.

And, to be fair, it is a pretty decent browser.

The road continues on to Arch from there.

Debian is becoming more and more viable as a desktop OS in the era of Flatpak and Distrobox. Trixie looks like a really nice release.

Big O

Can Open Source defend against copyright claims for AI contributions?

If I submit code to ReactOS that was trained on leaked Microsoft Windows code, what are the legal implications?

Sure. Let’s make sure that people know what this really means though.

Microsoft cannot “undo” the current license. If such a “rug pull” happens in the future, we all retain access to the code that exists at that time including all contributions from Microsoft. We can also all continue to not only use it but contribute to it under an Open Source license and keep it a vibrant, useful project if we want. Microsoft is powerless to stop us. We could fork it then or even now without the copyright assignment requirement. We have that freedom.

What the “rug pull” allows Microsoft to do is to decide, in the future, to change their policy and to make further changes themselves and not give us access to those future changes. They have that freedom.

Again, even if Microsoft did this, we could fork and carry-on. Look at Valkey and Reddis as an example.

So, the situation is that Microsoft is Open Sourcing a bunch of work that they did. The maximum possible downside is that they could stop giving us even more in the future. Our reaction is “meh”.

What concerns us is not that Microsoft can take away our freedom. They cannot. What upsets us is that they may retain or receive freedom we do not want them to have.

That is all fine. We are all allowed to think about it as we like and I guess we al value “freedom” in different ways. Sometimes though I think people misunderstand and think somehow that all the code could be “taken back”’. It cannot. Similarly, we might worry that our freedom (even the 4 freedoms) could be lost. For this code, that is not the case.

There are free RDP implentataiions

If you do not want to use software written by Red Hat, you have to stop using Linux. Quite frankly also much of the GNU suite such as Glibc and GCC. You would absolutely have to stop using either Xorg or Wayland. Systemd is just an example of something Red Hat created but they are massive contributors to a lot of other surf too.

I you want to avoid software written by profit motivated companies, you are down to about 15% of the open source ecosystem.

Please be aware that you are attacking people with principles. They simply value different principles than you.

I have no problem with the different principles or even that you dismiss those principles. Just be aware that you are.

https://github.com/phkaeser/wlmaker

There is no GNOME 5. They are up to GNOME 48 now.

That was it for me. I was actually a KDE user way back in the KDE 2 and 3 days. I found KDE 4 unusable. KDE 5 never won me over. But I have been using Plasma 6 on Wayland and am perfectly happy with it.

You are not wrong.

However, at this moment in history, there is another consideration.

Today, Cinnamon means X11 and KDE means Wayland. Xorg is becoming a second class citizen in KDE. Cinnamon is not there yet on Wayland.

In two years, you can be back to using either one as you prefer (on Wayland).