To be clear, the word "human" is used determine who can use the software because I am convinced that, when a company, institution, organization or corporation is created, it has its own intelligence, means and interests that go beyond and above the interests of human beings.
Many are scared of the singularity, thinking that general artificial intelligence out of human control is the greatest threat for humanity.
I am convinced that the greatest threat for humanity is more probably just a corporation operating to achieve its own interests.
Immediately fails to match the OSD due to rule 6: https://opensource.org/osd
The idea is, let experimenters tinker with it and help you develop your idea, while at the same time exclude companies, institutions, organizations and corporations. If the software is interesting for them they can contact the copyright holder to buy a different license.
Instead of giving away for free our work to entities that may work against our own interests, we give it away for free only to people like us.
How do you draw the line between companies and individuals? Is a one man consulting 'company' allowed to experiement with the software?
Personally, I feel the way to "save" the open source movement would be simply have maintainers start valuing their time more properly.
Something along the lines of "This is my project, you can use it if you want. If you want a patch added, pay me. If you want support, pay me."