Birds Are Not "Pests and Vermin", Privacy is Not a Crime, and GNU/Linux is Not 'Hacking Platform'
"Rats, mice, and cockroaches are common urban and suburban vermin," says the Wikipedia page, alluding to mice (Mus domesticus) and various mostly harmless animals, not something like insects or a dirty animal you'd find inside the toilet bowl, allegedly spreading diseases.
Here in this planet, which is occupied by humans, I've had polite arguments with local authorities. Despite being on holiday I rang up the relevant Manchester staff and discussed with them the false asserting that birds are somehow "vermin" or "attract vermin" and thus must not be fed. I also filed a complaint with the Manchester Town Hall (Council), replete with sufficient details to tackle this issue, the real issue, even if that means taking them to court. All relevant parties are copied on my complaint [1, 2, 3, 4] and this will probably take several months. What matters here is the outcome, not the duration of the process. We can set precedent.
I could not help but think of Free software analogies, as explained a few hours ago in the sister site (Google's Android and so-called "sideloading"). Google is doing something truly sinister by implying that all software installed outside of Google's control is malicious or that modifying a program (or creating a program) to run on Android is bad activity. As a former Android developer myself, I had to install and modify my programs maybe a thousand times (via adb). When Techrights and its sister site made Firefox extensions, for curation of links, we saw the same. Yes, due to Mozilla's "bad faith" attitude, we need to open up secret/hidden options and repeatedly add an extension each time the browser starts (because the extension is not "signed" and thus not "trusted" by Mozilla, an American corporation that promotes Ponzi schemes). This is insane. This is pure evil. But remember who sponsors or pays the salaries at Mozilla. It's Google. Firefox isn't Free software anymore and it's developed using proprietary software.
Now go a little further and consider how media portrays "Linux", making it look like only geeks can use it and only crackers would wish to use it. Some go further and suggest or insinuate (dishonest innuendo) that the only reason one would object to a centralised "trust" cartel (revisit 'UEFI 9/11' Part I, Part II, and Part III) is to do something unlawful and privacy/autonomy itself is presumed illegal. As if anyone who goes to a shop to purchase a kitchen knife intends to commit murder...
Birds are not "vermin" and GNU/Linux isn't criminal. Heck, an argument could be made to say that most proprietary software giants are hiding their code in order to hide their wrongdoing and possibly illegal behaviour, such as unauthorised data collection. █
“DRM is nearly always the result of a conspiracy of companies to restrict the technology available to the public. Such conspiracy should be a crime, and the executives responsible for it should be sentenced to prison.”
-Richard Stallman
"DRM is the future."
-Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO