The problem is that abortion is controversial and promoting it might cause people to want to disassociate from GNU. Free software is better for people regardless of what they think about abortion. Both sides of the abortion controversy could still agree on the issue of free software. But only when there is a separation of ideologies, because clearly anti-abortion folks are not going to want to link or donate to a pro-abortion project and similar for pro-abortion people and an anti-abortion project, respectively.Keeping ideologies separated isn't always a good idea. Free software doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's there for a purpose and this purpose is often linked to real-life situations that are tied to other ideologies/struggles.
I guess it depends on your definition of repressive. The article might have meant it in a neutral way. It is actually not good to scrutinise single words like I did because everyone uses slightly different definitions so it tends to lead to misunderstandings.Also, anti-abortion law are repressive: they're about taking away reproductive rights. Some people might argue that this is a good thing, but it's still repressive in itself)
What's your keyboard layout?"Rlvenholm", strange sounding name.
No clue why..
It's a reference to half-life and is a placeholder for the 'a', but it's indeed 'incorrect'The lambda sounds like the "l", "Rlvenholm" is how you pronounce it, it is not a typo. Or is it "ar-lambda-venholm"? That makes more sense, actually.
There’s a tornado watch in effect here for four and a half more hours.
while they fix a leak outside.