> not allowing GCC to be used as a library

Nothing wrong with that move from a strategic point of view. The objective was to leverage GCC and make others play ball. People who wanted GCC should have been forced to do things the free software way.

Only problem with this is it turned out GCC didn't provide enough leverage. Replacing GCC wasn't difficult enough. People implemented LLVM instead and the rest is history.

Compare that to Linux which literally leaves companies behind in the dust when they refuse to merge. No kernel ABI stability: if out-of-tree stuff gets broken it's not their problem. Companies have a choice: play ball or pay the maintenance costs required to keep up with the biggest free software project ever. That's how it should be.

> his comments on Jeffrey Esptein

By "everything" I of course meant his ideas on computer freedom which is the context of this thread. I don't know or care about his opinions on Epstein.

> a refusal to in any way compromise

As he should. If anything he's not extreme enough. Compromise is the root of many evils.

> a recognition that free software, while nice, does not in any way solve the underlying issues he claims it does

Elaborate.