Yes. And that doesn’t excuse it; a moderator should be better than the community they moderate.

“childish trolls in this community”, “this community is full of trolls”, “90% of folks here dont get the issue and rather troll”

The people who coined the term “open source” are the same people who founded OSI. If you don’t like their term, don’t use it.

Yes. You are free to distribute it in any way you wish. Some methods, like printing books, have a raw material cost. You can choose to pay someone to distribute via that method, or if you really want to, you can do the printing yourself at no cost but your own time and effort.

If you don’t want to give it away for free, then just don’t make it FOSS. It’s that simple. People use free-libre licenses because they want to use that license model. If you don’t want to, then don’t.

Good news, the GNU Image Manipulation Program is designed for manipulating photos

The employer doesn’t claim any intellectual property rights over my work product. I’m not able to find anywhere that the proprietary vendor does either.

You’re probably in the clear. Legalese isn’t so opaque that you would miss a section about this.

Of course, that doesn’t stop them from suing you if they decide your work could be very profitable for them.

I would expect any browser to properly render a page, regardless of platform. Are you sure the page is mobile-friendly? Why do you say it’s “not great”?

I think most people will continue to just use their smartphone and get a Fairphone or something if it matters to them.

This doesn’t really have anything to do with open source software. It’s more of a privacy topic. You can harvest as much data as you want and still be GPL.

VPN

I’m not sure what this guy is smoking, but I don’t want any. He talks about licenses being different from contracts, but there isn’t any significant difference. He talks about developers getting paid instead of releasing their work for free, but there’s nothing stopping anyone from doing this right now. Plenty of products offer business licenses separate from their copyleft licenses. Anyone who releases their software under GPL or whatever chooses to do that, because that’s what they want to do. If they wanted to make it only source-available, or to sell source access, they would have.