You know that you can change license of software that you own copyright to? You can take GPL code and change it to something else, but you can’t un-GPL existing released code. It’s the same thing with MIT.

The only people bound by the license are people who use it because it is licensed to them.

The difference is that organisation may develop MIT software without publishing their code.

It should be called „me being patronising to other people”. Kinda „I am so smart” material.

No, it has not „always been fine” - I’ve worked with people who disabled auto updates on their dev machines just to keep a specific kernel & driver version working together. Circa 2016 :)

Some countries have pretty strict laws about not promoting Nazi ideology - by pushing that notifications it would probably be breaking that law.

Stolen? It was forked as is allowed by the MIT license. With GPL as well there is no „you cannot fork” rule, you can do exactly the same thing. The author misunderstood that „you have to push the changes to upstream”, which is not in any of those licenses.