Personally I'm not worried about the micro optimization, I'm more a "why are you attempting to compete with sqlite" person.

(people keep saying things like "only Congress has the power to declare war"; that may be technically true, but a war declaration is a piece of paper, and practically the authorization of force is at the personal disposition of the President)

One of these questions where we, those doing the discourse, need to pick apart what the word "you" refers to here.

In this context, it is national governments, who have started to fear that there may come a day when they are not allowed to or able to or safe to run Windows. That gives rise to the question, "how can we get a system that minimizes the disruption of migrating away to Windows?"

Ultimately it's not about specifically wanting AD or GP as technologies, either, but the things they enable: seamless single-sign-on across an organization, and management of software security and updates across a fleet of desktops.

(possibly the thing that fills this hole is simply a fleet of consultants which go around explaining things to CIOs!)

Every Linux system that supports SSH potentially "accepts" remote management! The challenge is just putting it into a framework.

Isn't it about time someone developed one?

The foundations are there; you can imagine an organization deploying laptops with, say, Ansible, and not giving users root on them. LDAP sort of matches the old capabilities of AD, but not completely. There's even a "SAMBA as fake domain controller" mode.

Ironically what it needs is a product or service which organizations can pay to take the problem off their hands. But then people get stuck in never paying for anything in the open source world.

But this really highlights how much we've been benefiting from living in a high-trust society, where people don't just "go on the internet and tell lies" - filtered by the existing anti-spam and anti-SEO measures intended to cut out the 80% of the internet where people do just make things up to sell products.

LLMs are extremely post-structuralist. They really force the user to decide whether to pick the beautiful eternal fountain of plausible looking text with no ground truth, or a much harder road of distrust, verification, and old-school social proof.

I think I see a problem here.

Ah yes, situation where the government makes a plan and then hands it to the one (1) qualified defense contractor whose facilities are build in swing states to benefit specific congressional campaigns is completely different from central planning.

(Of course the EFF are ideological, that's their entire purpose!)