I believe it was bootstrapped with tech from Philips. I didn’t know it was American.

I have come to think that Lisps are meta-progranming-only languages.

I believe the Delta Chat client started off as a fork of the Telegram client.

Your point seems to be “open-source-with-monetization now has a problem, but altruistic-source doesn’t”. Maybe the linked blog was that narrow in focus on open-source, and you force-expanded it to altruistic-source.

I think projects with principles are in the same quandry as those with a monetization objective. Software under GPL-like licenses has a problem, LLMs slurp up Linux and GCC source code and spit out non-compliant derivative work. It is no longer possible to promote principles by contributing in the open. There is also no hope of software authors winning damages from companies the way book authors seem to have won in court.

You can’t call uncaring consumption or negligent cost-cutting measures geo-engineering. Geo-engineering is an expense, and whoever spends is looking at their returns, which is an incentive to do worse than uncaring consumption etc.

I am a … fan … of social ecology etc. But I feel such theories are difficult to apply in today’s large-scale politics. Even the path to trying out any such theories in practice probably starts with trying smaller changes like liquid democracy (that is already proven in the corporate shareholder world).

These theories might go through massive changes if they meet reality. Remnants of past “experiments”, say the basis of Liedloff’s continuum concept, are not quite as neat as these untested theories.