You use both ad hominem ("this guy again? For those unaware, Florian Mueller...") and a strawman argument ("all built on the incorrect assumption that running proprietary software on a Free kernel/libc is illegal.")
The claim is not that running proprietary software on a free kernel is illegal. The claim is that by linking to Bionic, which may violate the GPL, the proprietary software might become "derived works" of the kernel.
That's not ad-hominem; ad-hominem is "this guy is paid to attack Free software, therefore his argument is invalid". Merely pointing out an obvious conflict of interest is not ad-hominem.
The second statement is not a strawman -- that is his actual (implied) argument. Otherwise, the whole thing about Bionic is completely irrelevant. Bionic's license status only matters to client software if licenses are assumed to propagate across the library boundary. If running proprietary software with a Free libc is OK, then a GPL'd Bionic is no risk to proprietary software linked against it.
The ad-hominem is implied, since the conflict of interest you claim to have pointed out was made up, hence the only reason to point it out was to imply the argument was invalid.
Comments
You use both ad hominem ("this guy again? For those unaware, Florian Mueller...") and a strawman argument ("all built on the incorrect assumption that running proprietary software on a Free kernel/libc is illegal.")
The claim is not that running proprietary software on a free kernel is illegal. The claim is that by linking to Bionic, which may violate the GPL, the proprietary software might become "derived works" of the kernel.
That's not ad-hominem; ad-hominem is "this guy is paid to attack Free software, therefore his argument is invalid". Merely pointing out an obvious conflict of interest is not ad-hominem.
The second statement is not a strawman -- that is his actual (implied) argument. Otherwise, the whole thing about Bionic is completely irrelevant. Bionic's license status only matters to client software if licenses are assumed to propagate across the library boundary. If running proprietary software with a Free libc is OK, then a GPL'd Bionic is no risk to proprietary software linked against it.
The ad-hominem is implied, since the conflict of interest you claim to have pointed out was made up, hence the only reason to point it out was to imply the argument was invalid.