Have you got a source for the GPL non compliance ?

If I remember what I saw during the day, and from recaps since then, it was only the Bambu Studio slicer (that is a fork of Prusa Slicer), which was provided with review units but without the source code being released yet. The code was released in time for production units. The only violation of the license is if they did not provide the code to reviewers when asked (which may have happened, but is not as clear cut as what their competitors imply)

Even users of APGL sometimes are clueless about its reach. One example is minio which is AGPL now, and the dev regularly make false statements about the license on their github: https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/13308#issuecomment-929...

That's just embarrassing. Stop that, guy.

Congrats on the success, but I feel like you hit gold because MS has little to no interest in providing actual good software for their users. Hopefully for you that stays that way and you can maybe expand to other areas where they come short (basically anything in Teams)

You state it as if it were a coincidence. The important point is that the author identified the problem and filled the gap.

> I started reading forums, comments, and online discussions. It turned out the built-in Wiki in Microsoft Teams annoyed users really a lot.

I admit I didn't read the entirety of the post, but I read the following:

> Many of our clients came to us after trying the Microsoft built-in Wiki. It was clunky, inconvenient, and didn’t do the job well. We focused on simplicity: the essential features only, nothing extra — and everything should function inside Microsoft Teams.

So I know it wasn't a coincidence, and rarely are such software built without understanding the needs first.

I just wanted to point out that in this case, the business relies on Microsoft not doing a proper job. Otherwise they would be at a serious risk of being Sherlocked by the provider.

They already expanded it to Slack and other platforms.

Slack is, I think, mainly focused on the messaging and relies on third parties to integrate other features. Microsoft is a behemoth that wants to sell their complete software suite and tries to integrate all of them together for a "seamless" experience. They do have an incentive for their own products to be good and used instead of third parties.

Plus once they realize how much data is in these wikis, they will want to ingest them for AI (if not already done), so there is an incentive for them to have more users on their solution instead.

Edit: And even if the OP is not relying only on MS for sales, they still depend heavily on them and their App Store. They are not competing with Confluence or other systems, they are competing with Teams itself.

Agreed!

The law for cookie and privacy consent is (afaik) applicable to any EU citizen or resident, even if they are not currently located in the EU. That means if you do business in the EU, you have to show the banner for everybody because you cannot know if they are an EU citizen/resident from their IP alone.

It's much easier to blame the cookie banner on GDPR (which are not entirely related) than read the texts and jurisprudence about it to know how it works.

Every website showing a consent screen is either willfully ignorant (rarer these days) or they want your data while saying hypocritical things like «We value your privacy»

Strong track record of already snooping on all your traffic within their browsers ?

Why is that? We're not saying it's definitely Russia, but exploring the possibility they could be behind this.

After the multiple sabotages, killings, corruption, as well as the invasion of a neighbor country, we have some reasons to think Russia is a bad state actor.

Europe is helping Ukraine it its defense against Russia. Russia has sabotaged a lot of things in multiple EU countries, including Spain. It's not far fetched to imagine Russia being the root cause of this, or being implicated in some way. Even if they are not, they 100% are watching this closely and learn how they can disrupt power throughout Europe.

> The EU is clearly otherwise willing to watch Ukraine fall.

All the money, humanitarian aid, weapons, intelligence, training and geopolitical backing beg to differ.

Did Russia say they did it? No.

So you can weaken your opponent without getting the backlash.

I'm not saying Russia did it, just that they could be the cause of this. Weakening Europe is in their interest, and they already have blatantly done smaller scale sabotage. It wouldn't weaken their position, as you said, Europe is not really interested in taking Russia seriously atm. Sabotages, killings, politician corruption and public disinformation have been common tactics for them for a decade now. Now that Russia's #1 enemy is under their control, I'm not sure they are afraid to take on Europe more directly.

From my past experience, I can say that Google Cloud services (e.g load balancers) by default blocked traffic from ITAR sanctioned countries. Not just blocking people in those countries from becoming customers of GCP, but blocking them from accessing content hosted on GCP.

I didn't know how that situation had evolved since I last used GCP.

Why do you think it's Iran doing blocking?

That's not what Google says: https://support.google.com/a/answer/2891389?hl=en

Workspace is not gcp.

And IIRC, it's illegal in the EU and Belgium has been paying fines every year because they don't want to change the status quo. Better for the country to pay fines (from our tax money) than companies paying a salary to their interns...