Did any distro give concrete reasons for why they have actively chosen not to package it, or perhaps they just haven’t given it much thought yet?

This is not what I would consider a “political reason”. A political reason would be something like refusing to package it because of what political party Howard supports.

There is plenty of software you’ll find in these repositories that aren’t under the GPL. CMake uses BSD, the Apache web server uses the eponymous Apache license, LibreOffice and Firefox use MPL, Godot and Bitcoin Core use the MIT license, and I’m sure there are plenty of other software licenses that I haven’t thought of yet.

What is Hygge?

Yes, they’re similar, but from what I’ve heard, most UK building societies are basically the same as or worse than banks in terms of fees, rates, and service quality. In the US, most credit unions will absolutely spank the big banks on at least two of those, if not all three.

Oops, I didn’t see that. My bad. Guess I made a fool of myself here.

deleted by creator

I will start. I’m in the United States.

Credit unions! Nearly half of all Americans are credit union members. They don’t seem to be popular in Europe and Asia. A credit union is a not-for-profit co-operative financial institution that essentially provides all the same services as a bank, except it’s run as a democratic institution with directors elected by the customers instead of as a profit maximisation machine for shareholders.

Yeah, and eating hot dogs also goes against human nature. That shit didn’t exist in 3,500 BCE.

Maybe someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Wayland’s security model intentionally prevent this type of “tampering” with another application’s display?

POV you hid your copy of The Guy Game in your neighbour’s house

Rule #3: always assume the anonymous 4chan poster is making it up

The AITAH people are nothing if not weirdly observant of what happens on that sub. This would be caught immediately

What are the implications of this?

Can someone explain the context of this to me?

I hope you realise that the comment you replied to is really just a reference to the Succulent Chinese Meal video.

The source is this article.

It’s not just “technically difficult” to eavesdrop. Properly implemented, it’s computationally impossible to eavesdrop on a connection secured with TLS.

Not being end-to-end encrypted is meaningless to law enforcement if Telegram refuses to turn over the chat contents (which they do). Law enforcement can’t just eavesdrop on the conversation without Telegram’s cooperation. The chat contents are still secured by TLS from the user’s device to the Telegram servers.

Smart professional criminals rarely use Telegram for this stuff anyway. There’s WhatsApp and plenty of other popular platforms of end-to-end encrypted

What is the charge? For operating a messaging platform? A succulent private messaging platform?

Do you think before you post?

If you’re developing software for one client who only uses a specific browser, I can see this being okay, but several times I have chosen not to buy things from websites that were broken in Firefox. I don’t bother to check whether they’d work in Chromium, I just buy it elsewhere.

The number of people who act like me probably isn’t large in absolute terms, but how many customers have been lost because of a broken website that you didn’t even know about because they just left without a trace?

This might not apply to you, but it’s some food for thought whenever Web developers decide to be sloppy and not check compatibility for a browser that still has significant market share.