I do not get your take. It is obvious that early 2000s Russia wanted special treatment. It is also obvious that it was not getting it, ever. If it did not take a stance of “special treatment country”, Russia would most likely be a NATO member without “special” priveledges (I assume that most notable is selling war assets to allied countries). Still, the intent was to cooperate, as late as 2012. Internally, there was even a promise of Visa-free access to Schengen

Something about “you should apply” vs “you should invite us”. Noone wants to bow to another and then tension raised over it. Seems pretty believable to me, especially with what was going on domestically

IMO, the new council they have made in Rome in 2002 (NATO-Russia Council) and its predecessor (Permanent Joint Council, 1997) existence should have stopped the farce with “oh no, they are expanding”, and a start of joint cooperation. Maybe not as NATO memebership, but as a new working alliance. Right after founding of NRC though, Russia decided that it wont proceed with NATO membership

Quotes of Putin from Ukraine joint press conference, 2002 (source: http://www.en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/21598)

Russia does not intend to join NATO. Russia, as you know, is engaged in a very constructive dialogue with NATO to create a new Russia-NATO structure “at twenty”, in which all twenty countries will be represented as nations, each having one vote, and all the issues will be solved without prior consultations, without any prior decisions on a number of issues being taken first within the bloc.

And a curious snippet

I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will not shy away from the processes of expanding interaction with NATO and the Western allies as a whole. Ukraine has its own relations with NATO; there is the Ukraine-NATO Council. At the end of the day the decision is to be taken by NATO and Ukraine. It is a matter for those two partners.

Guess money and power do change people.

Declassified (by the US) documents mention that Putin wanted to join without waiting in queue with “insignificant countries” (in early 2000s, who would that be? Baltic countries?), and as late as 2012 there was a contract for usage Russian airport as transit hub to Afghanistan (https://m.gazeta.ru/politics/2012/06/29_a_4650373.shtml, was looking specifically for pro-Russian media as a source)

Why would I discount the most popular applications of the kernel? That is almost the whole userbase

That is an entirely different argument which I did not contest and the comment I have answered to did not make

EDIT: Although, it depends on what we define as “bigger”. Binary size is certainly bigger, but user adoption is abysmal comparatively.

But what about Linux distributions compiled without GNU tools? Most popular Linux distribution’s kernel currently is compiled with Clang, not GCC, and as far as I am aware does not include anything from GNU. Of course Linux is historically influenced by GNU, but in current day and age they are orthogonal

It has currency conversion, but it expects specific format

I see, good to know. I didn’t know about Tailscale so wasnt aware that it is a frontend for WireGuard. Although have to comment that ZeroTier is its own protocol

How is Tailscale different from ZeroTier in this setup?