What's the threat? Solaris/Illumos, the BSDs, even Windows, have all tried -sometimes more than once- to be compatible with the Linux ABI, and in the end they've all given up because the Linux ABI evolves way too fast to keep up and is underdocumented. Someday someone -perhaps TFA- will succeed in building momentum for a well-defined and highly functional least common denominator subset of the Linux ABI, and that will be a very good thing (IMO) regardless of their choice of license.
I guess you imagine that everyone will switch to Moss and oh-noes!-everyone-will-be-free-to-not-contribute-back!! So what?
Receiving a gift does not confer obligations on the recipient.
People can license their code however they please, but comparing open source software to a gift is not an argument for permissive licenses.
Anyone can write Photoshop (provided reasonable resources). The problem is going to be proprietary file format and compatibility with the ecosystem. It's same with hardware, except several orders of magnitude worse.
I have to say the GPL trolling in this post is some of the worst I've ever seen on HN. Literally 99% of the comments GPL trolls coming in and thread shitting everywhere. It's genuinely disgusting.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/stable-api-non...
Per your link
> Note: Please realize that this article describes the in kernel interfaces, not the kernel to userspace interfaces.