Closed Software's Danger to Privacy and Climate

Why can't the references be inline links? Why do we need to preserve the presentation of links as "footnotes" in the Web?

I don't quite understand the genre. This isn't newspaper advocacy for free software, where the improbable idea can be presented that one source of regulatory failure brought on by software secrecy for one sort of automobile software is going to, or ever could, result in a general requirement of "source-available" software throughout new cars, let alone that such a condition will result in user-modifiable free software in cars. But this isn't professional commentary either, in which, for example, speculation about how to use the Securities and Exchange Act is accompanied by any citation of authority to suggest that the speculation is legally plausible. Nor does the civil procedure involved in using shareholder lawsuits to force disclosure through discovery, where "trade secrets" are always produced under seal, and no disclosure ever actually results.

So I'm left wondering who the real audience of the draft is. The best way to improvement, it seems to me, is to make a real piece of legal analysis out of it, about one part of the existing widespread account, and do that work with precision in the short space available.