Meanwhile, .tech exists and is not country-specific but is far less popular for some reason.

Simple answer: length.

Two chars look a lot better than something with more chars, and all two chars TLD are ccTLDs.

Only issue I see is that the 8 chars required is very short and easy to brute force. You would hope that people would go for the recommended instead, but doubt it.

Re: Downvote bots. I can’t say they’re necessarily bots, but my instance has scripts that flag accounts that exclusively give out downvotes and then bans them. That’s about the best I can do, at present, to counter those for my users.

It is usually not a good idea to specify what your exact metrics are for a ban. A bad actor could see that and then get around it by randomly upvoting something every now and then.

There is also the risk of homograph attacks. The link below is for domain name encoding via IDN, but the same applies to usernames. You could easily impersonate another user by having chars that look similar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDN_homograph_attack

Sure, but even if they started tomorrow it would probably be years before it even could be considered experimental outside of the most daring early adaptors.

Having a combability layer is not ideal but it would mean they could have something worker for more users faster and at the same time see which modules/drivers they should focus on.

And ethernet port!

“Thread closed due to inactivity.”

And if it succesful, or at least passenger doesn’t boycott them over it, it is just a question of time until other airlines adds it as well

That is still source code, obfuscated but still source code.

Counting in lines of code is the most stupid metric.

It works quite fine, use it daily. Well, XMMS2 to be pedantic.

Just some shellscripts bound to windows-keys to pause/play and load new files.

The question is whether x86 is even relevant anymore

Also RISC-V, though that is probably a few years away at least.

That seems to be the general atmosphere, “leaving money”. They probably analysed it and thought it wasn’t worth the effort. Companies like to make money after all.

You still need to keep supporting it for future releases, make sure it actually works and not just builds, test, update QA pipeline, tell support, etc etc

You are getting downvoted by people that have no idea how software development and maintence works.

Every feature cost. More than most people realise. Both in development time and to maintain it over time and releases. It all adds up, not saying EA are correct in not supporting it. But to think it is free is just incorrect.

They made a business decision to not support it. We think it is the wrong decision, but it is ultimately theirs to make.

He could have handled it better. But he didn’t call the code crap directly, just the bundle of everything.

Having a meta package and let users choose seems like the best way. But this is a Debian issue, and not a keepassxc issue. It is up to Debian to package it anyway they want.

Exactly. And if you want those features, you install the full version. Packages can break in sid, that is the whole point of it.

I am also running sid and keepassxc and I see no problem with this change. In fact it seems like a very sane thing to do, and something I wished more packages did.

It is still just a “trust us” deal. They say they have deleted it, and all you can do is trust them. They could possibly get into legal troubles if it was shown they were lying, but that could be easily avoided as well.

GDPR is ok, but much of it is based on good actors doing what they should.

Why not just go full WSL?

Most of those cookie banners are not even needed, you only need them for tracking cookie, not login and session cookies. But of course everyone decided it is just easier to nag all the users with a big splash screen.

A lot of them are not even doing it right, you are not allowed to hint the user that accept all is the “correct” choice by having it in a different color than the others. And being able to say no to all shouls be as easy as accepting all, often it isn’t.

Basically, cookie banners are usually not needed and when they are they are most often incorrectlt designed (not by accident).