Very little is obsolete that fast. I don't think it shows a lack of respect for my freedom. The goal is to place some (rather minor) restrictions on businesses, and businesses are not people.
Isn't two years of security patch lag a big deal?
Also I feel like "obsolete" is the wrong word for that.
Your phrasing is malicious. It waves off a 40 year fight from many reasonable people as extreme and ridiculous, or as religious-like.
Did you expect me to answer "no, nothing else than puritanism" to your question?
Well, I won't.
That's like saying that although I could, I won't vote for candidate C who is against the freedom of the press when candidate C would prevent awful newspaper N from publishing its horrible bullshit.
I'd prefer newspaper N not to publish bullshit, or even to not exist at all, but I wouldn't want this to cost the freedom of the press.
AWS doing terrible things shouldn't cost us user software freedom.
Yes, indeed, there's stuff that I will do or won't do out of principles, of course! Even if it would be convenient to do otherwise! Is this an alien concept?
How is this difficult to understand that someone doesn't want compromises on rights that ought to be fundamental?
I've written about this in other comments, but this happened to me in 2015 hosting Elasticsearch and the official Elasticsearch hosting offering just didn't support CPU configurations that were proper for geohashing heavy workloads. I had to switch to AWS to get that. They even talked to the head of sales, and they said, yeah, we're working on it, but right now your best bet is to switch. Under a license like this, that wouldn't be possible.
Being stuck between "host it yourself" or "don't have the latest features" is pretty far from a rock and hard place.
Businesses are precisely and exactly people.
Yes a business is made out of people, but that's a very different thing from what I was talking about.
(And please don't mention sole proprietorships, what I meant should be plenty clear now.)
We're talking about freedoms, not the ability to interact with the legal system.
Company personhood and its implications and restrictions differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and in countries like the USA the exact definition is still a matter up for debate.