But then just don’t use google authenticator and instead one of the FOSS alternatives? Aegis comes to mind.

Like the original reply to your situation said, you do you - but this seems a weird threat model to me, extra-step point notwithstanding.

Not sure I understand - if you only have 3-4 packages you can just search for them specifically in the long list?

Even if you have 50 or 100s of packages, bash makes it pretty doable

comm -12 <(sort -u file1.txt) <(sort -u file2.txt) > common.txt

Should spit out only the packages appearing in both lists (done by memory so may not be 100%)

…why?

Built around our proprietary [architecture], fully open sourced and transparent.

And just to be very explicit why this is an issue: each time the package is upgraded through an automated update, the PKGBUILD may change (e.g. to adapt to different dependencies, file structure, etc introduced with new app version).

That also means an AUR maintainer can smuggle in malware with any of those updates, even if you checked the original PKGBUiLD when you installed. And, anyone can request taking over maintenance for unmaintained packages, so it can even happen if the original maintainer was benevolent.

Always check PKGBUILD files on upgrade, even if just a glance. If I remember correctly yay had a function to always show you PKGBUILD diffs before updates, not sure if that was automatically enabled.

Was it already with the same text/emoji combo?

Cause that particular tears of joy emoji only became standardized in Unicode 6.0, 2010. It was presumably around a bit before that but nobody except the Japanese really did a lot of emoji stuff much before that (iirc Google and Apple only started adding the first emoji to their keyboards 2007-08).

Either way would find it very interesting if somebody was already using the emoji way before that, or the text area of the picture went through multiple iterations.

isn’t the better solution not to accept PRs from unknown / untrusted sources

I think that’s partly the point of this exercise - if they find a meow they now know this is an untrusted source.

Because it’s pretty easy to say ‘ignore untrusted sources’ but when you’re maintaining an open source repo (especially if it’s still pretty small/new) this detection is part of the cognitive burden. Almost every contribution will technically be from an unknown source for a long time, until, if you’re lucky, some drive-by contributors turn regular.

I think that’s the perfect choice of distinguishing phrases.

KDE is very customizable (perhaps too much for more casual users) while Gnome is hackable with the extension system - but it will always feel a little more tacked on, be a little less stable, prone to upgrade breakage, etc.

As a corollary to OPs argument, there’s also a reason Niri and Cosmos didn’t stay Gnome extensions.

(But at the end of the day, if the Gnome experience niche works for you, more power to you.)

You’ll have to point me even closer because none of the comments I have seen on that post state what happened is different than what I described above?

I can see a comment stating the switch is justified in their eyes, but it doesn’t negate that it is a bait-and-switch model.

Can you explain?

As far as I can see OP took the original article headline verbatim; the article itself does describe the exact kind of bait-and-switch model as I’ve heard it used: company offers open standard edition, after a while switches it to basic / ‘core’ offering which locks e.g. Linux access behind a (steep) paywall.

deleted by creator

When you say ‘society did not force her’, what exactly do you mean by this?

Can you spell out the scenario that you concocted in your head as to how a girl, harshly bullied by having faked nude material of her passed around school without her consent, in front of her, should correctly behave in this situation? Keeping in mind, of course, that she already went to the socially acceptable and correct official channels which did nothing to help her?