This is about Digital Services Act, not physical products.

OpenBSD has a "netiquette" doc for its mailing lists: https://www.openbsd.org/mail.html

Not sure if you want to count it as a "code of conduct", but it certainly defines rules on how to communicate and contribute to the project.

I'd count it as one in the general sense I'd count the style(9) manpage as another, not in the specific sense I indicated I was referring to:

> ... fine without a code of conduct — in the sense bakugo employed "code of conduct," not in the generalized sense ...

Agreed, if you need programmable content you can add some Javascript: https://www.markdownlang.com/advanced/javascript.html

> In some cases, I am asking: "Why is this program or functionality an attack surface? Why can someone on the internet write to this system?"

With the help of LLMs, every software not in a vault has an attack surface. LLMs are quite good at finding different, non-obvious paths, and you can easily test their exploit candidates.

So this website is asking for 25€ to "[pursue] DMA enforcement against LinkedIn". No timeline, no measurable goals, jump an ask for money.

LinkedIn has an API you can use at your convenience: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/linkedin/

Accessing other users' LinkedIn data via the API requires their OAuth consent, as it should be. But you are welcome to access your own data via the API.

Can I, an ordinary user, get access to that API and use it to fetch my messages?

Last time I checked, I could not.

> This would be in the same vein as Google Chrome replacing ManifestV2 with ManifestV3, ostensibly for performance- and security-related purposes, when it just so happens that ManifestV3 limits the ability to block ads in Chrome… the major source of revenue for Google.

uBlock Origin Lite (compatible w/ ManifestV3) works quite well for me, I do not see any ads wherever I browse.

The mv3 problem was never about "does it work now". It was about "can it keep up". Ad blocking is a cat and mouse game, and the mouse is kneecapped now. You're being slow boiled.

Well said. I'm glad that as blockers have managed to develop effective approaches under Mv3, but it took a tremendous amount of engineering effort that was only necessary because Google was trying to impose these very large costs on them.

24-hour latency to make a payment? What is this, the 20th century?

This is for rescue, not for payment. Once you've moved the coins to quantum-secure wallet, the delay would no longer be needed.

...probably some people would be very inconvenienced by this. But not as inconvenienced as having the coins stolen or declared forever inaccessible.

> ...probably some people would be very inconvenienced by this. But not as inconvenienced as having the coins stolen or declared forever inaccessible.

I don't know why anyone f's around with crypto anymore. So many caveats, such a scammy ecosystem. It just doesn't seem worth the trouble to support a ransomware and money laundering tool.

Safebrowsing does not provide popularity metrics for downloads, to my knowledge. It only states whether a URL is malicious according to some Google checks. No amount of popularity would turn a malicious URL into a benign one.

Does this count? Putin won 88% of the vote in the 2024 Russian election. Not sure of the sampling bias there.