No? It wasn't? "The OS for your e-waste" isn't a good name for an OS this good. Also the old name was long, and with Google riling up FOSS advocates and annoying a good portion of normal users with their recent decisions, this is the perfect wave of criticism of Android and endorsement of alternatives to ride with some marketing.

I'd say the logo needs a redesign too.

edit: after reading the article, I think "Nurag" or "Nuragh" would've been better, but anything is better than the old name IMO.

You cannot fall off the earth silly. There's an impenetrable dome, guarded by NASA agents stationed all around the globe. Besides, there's nothing beyond the dome. Space is fake and everything you see in the sky is either within the dome or on its inner surface.

SMH normies can't get the most obvious stuff right.

Probably a one time purchase typically between 5$ to 10$

You'd have the server provide the code to your browser, and do the encryption/decryption client-side.

Yes, OP has a problem with this part. You'd have to trust the website to serve you the clean client side JS each time you use it. The proposal requires you to check the source code (which is plain un-minified JS) of the extension to make sure it's doing what's advertised when you download it the first time and with each update, instead of having to check the client side (obfuscated / minified) JS of every website each time you use it.

I would not install an arbitrary browser extension from Github. That's just bad security hygiene. Extensions have way too many privileges, there's not enough mechanisms to ensure that an extension is used only on the site that it's intended for, and there's no safe way to maintain updates.

That's true, but auditing that one extension (even on every update), which may be used by other websites in the future, giving it more attention and audits, is a lot easier than checking the client side JS of every website.

If it's a solid extension which could be used by other websites, and it's explained clearly like in your post by the website which needs it, then probably yes.

Maybe because you can't make sure the server uses the code it advertises without modification (The source code could be open and safe, but how can you make sure the website is actually using that?), while the extension is open source and could be downloaded directly from Github by the user. And if enough websites start using this system, it could gradually stop being an extra extension for that one website.

There's a popular frontend for Lemmy called "Tesseract". About a week ago the dev pushed an apparently malicious update with a block list which contains lots of leftist (as in even slightly left leaning) communities and users.

OP searched for and found his username in that block list.

The file OP searched in is "policy.json", which doesn't exist in the source code. The command pulls the content of the url decodes it from base64, unzips it and puts the content in policy.json. Which means the source code obfuscates the file by default.

(the only file called "policy" I could find in the source code is a .dat file which has the encoded data).

Very integral. When someone says they're "struggling with Rust", it's thanks to the borrow checker.

Rust's whole shtick is the way it manages memory, which is the rules enforced by the borrow checker.

Basically:

When you want to store values in variables in any programming language, the memory should be allocated when you need it and freed as soon as you don't anymore.

Traditionally there are two ways this is done:

1. You manage it completely yourself, which is "unsafe" as you can forget to free memory you no longer need. This is called leaking memory. Or "reference" the location of something you freed previously, thereby attempting to read data you may not have permission to read (the OS will usually prevent that and kill the program), or reading and using a value you didn't expect, causing undefined behavior and fun to deal with bugs.

2. The language, sometimes using a process which runs alongside your main program, manages memory. Which adds lots of overhead.

Rust has it's own way of doing this: It adds some rules on how you can pass around references and ownership and these rules are affected by whether you can or can't edit the referenced data. All just so the compiler knows the lifetime of the vars that hold that data and when it can free it (before the program is even compiled, so no overhead when the program is running). Not following the strict rules prevents your program from being compiled into an executable.

The compiler gives very helpful info, tips, and pointers™ though, Rust is also know for this.

Isn't "otherworldly" specifically the vibe they are going for? They are basically trying to make this portal to this other, heavenly world I always thought.

Not really. Some mosques incorporate imagery inspired by Quranic verses describing landscapes or scenery from heaven, but Islamic heaven is just gardens, rivers of honey, milk and wine, grand white or gold buildings and castles. So a mosque which incorporates them would look more natural and less "intimidating", nothing like the one in the picture. A mosque which fits that description is the Umayyad mosque.

Mosques are decorated this way most of the time because they're "houses of God". So they nearly always incorporate Quranic verses and names of God in specific calligraphy styles of Arabic, use "preferred colors" of Islam: white, black, green, red, dark blue, dark brown, and look luxurious and abstract.

WDYM Libadwaita is not customizable? Libadwaita is the most customizable UI lib I would say. You literally can just change every part of any app through css and call it a day.

I haven't tried doing it in a while, but I remember it being very difficult to change themes beyond tint and colors, with lots of apps having custom colors not in the pallet used in the "gtk.css" file.

Gnome is great.

Most Linux users can't deal with every single project not prioritizing customization. Gnome having a unique workflow (which is a great one) is unbearable for some reason.

I am not gonna place the full blame on the Linux community though. Gnome started out way more customizable, so maybe that suddenly getting pulled from underneath Gnome users so inconsiderately gave it a bad reputation.

Then they went and did absurd things with libadwaita to not only stop supporting customization, but actively interfere with people's choices of customizing Gnome and libadwaita apps so apps ~"are viewed and used as intended by their developers, and people don't accidentally break apps and complain to the devs" (i.e. Bullshit).

Literally the only foundation that made Linux usable, stable, unified and customizable.

I really can't see how. It's popular and user friendly, but I can't seriously give it that much importance.

For me at least: It just serves to show that Linux UIs can be clean, consistent, and user friendly. Which might pull in funding from companies and governments looking for a good UI to mass deploy.

But if it didn't exist, Plasma would've eventually filled that vacuum.

so I can't confirm that the Hanafi school has actually decided how Islamic law treats hot cat girl sex.

Bruh, it's the Hanafi school. It's Halal if she's a Muslim, obviously.