I think the point is that the criticisms of systemd are all technically
minded. For example, yeah, you could say that you think having an "X" to
close the window on the top-right instead of the top-left is morally wrong
because it "goes against the philosophy" of some OS you're used to, but it
doesn't hold water because there isn't any legitimate basis for an ethical
concern there. Likewise, I can't think of anything people complain about in
systemd that there is any legitimate ethical basis to be upset about. For
example:
* Going against "Unix philosophy": just a design preference, or does that
mean that any OS that isn't a Unix system is unethical somehow?
* The way logs, scripts, etc are done: so you don't like it done that way.
What, is C++ unethical because I don't like it?
* The way the developer develops it: so you don't trust him. Or maybe you
just don't like him personally. Ergo, you have to like everyone who develops
a program you use? On what basis? Certainly not any ethical one I can think
of. Last I checked it wasn't unethical to be unpopular.
This is an issue of pragmatism and personal preference, not ethics. So I
think it does logically follow that people will flock over to the better
option. The only exception would be if you think copyleft is unethical (like
the BSD developers do), in which case the only problem you face is that
systemd is a popular copylefted collection of software.
