It does that for some decades already. The trick for dual booting was always to install Linux second. :/

They don’t want you to see the “if benchmark_xyz { do less work }” blocks of code.

In order to compete in user experience we need to up our game. We need to set up communities which collect, categorize and funnel user requests upstream. These features should be focused on:

• reducing frictions like unclear UI, broken links, etc.
• improving usability of the various web frontends (the one from Lemmy, kbin, etc.)
• collecting bug reports and making sure they will be fixed

This is meant to be a proxy between average users and tech enthusiasts who know how to do pull requests or open GitHub issues. Moderators of these communities would do it for them. This would enable us to gain visibility in the needs of the users.

This is only a part of what needs to be done, but I think this can be done quickly.

Scenario:

1. Sign up for RedHat account
2. Acquire source code
3. distribute source code
4. RedHat cancels your account
5. you still have the binaries (and are allowed to, they’re GPL)
6. you want the source code again… but can’t. Account is closed.

Now you’re in a situation where you’re entitled to receive the source code, but can’t because they won’t let you.

If this will ever go to court, I suspect RedHat will pursue a “corner case” solution. A canceled account will probably have access to the source code from RedHat *up to that very cancel-date" and you’ll not get a new binary (from them). So it should be mostly legal for them to do so.

However, as long as no trademark of RedHat is violated, distributing individual RHEL binaries (not the full images, they contain trademarked assets) should be fine. So you could receive a binary through that route and be entitled to the source code for it, starting the whole process over again.

One could always fork it, though I like the name. I’m a LeGuin fan.