They recently announced a partnership with Motorola Mobility (a subsidiary of China’s Lenovo) to offer it on a non-Google phone. Is this what you had in mind?

Seems like they could be experimenting with an LLM to improve server-side anti-cheat.

In case you want to try some others:

https://simplelogin.io/
https://relay.firefox.com/
https://www.33mail.com/
https://erine.email/

Unfortunately, some misguided (or possibly malicious) people collect email forwarding domains like these and publish them in lists dishonestly advertised as spam or disposable address lists. An unfortunate number of service developers have taken to using these lists, leading to the situation you’re in now.

The best suggestions I can offer:

• Complain to the administrators of each site that does this, making sure to explain why it’s a problem. There’s a chance that some of them honestly don’t realize that legitimate forwarding domains are being swept up into a dragnet intended for spammers, and might stop using those lists if they were made aware.
• When choosing a forwarding service, pick one offering domain names that haven’t been picked up by the blacklists. This might require non-default settings when creating a forwarding address, or paying for access to the more obscure domains.

Thanks for posting this. I’ve been keeping MX Linux in the back of my mind as a possible Debian alternative if I ever need one.

they aren’t letting me post this testimonial in the MX forum because it doesn’t accept anon-aliased emails for logins.

Ouch. That’s a red flag for me, since it forces people to expose themselves to spam and tracking if they want to participate in the community. Which alias service did they reject? Maybe there’s one that doesn’t trigger their rule?

I mean, pretty much every desktop environment that’s not Gnome or KDE has been dragging its feet.

To be fair, migrating a desktop environment from X11 to Wayland is a lot of work, Wayland still hasn’t reached feature parity, and most desktop environments are maintained by very few people with scant resources. It’s no surprise that the big ones are ahead of the others.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=977US_SUGg8&t=4560s

That laughably understates the RAM required for Windows to be useful.

the Linux ecosystem that’s currently driving away developers in droves with fragmentation to consider that.

I am very skeptical of this. Exactly which developers are being driven away “in droves” because of packaging system differences? If you want to make a case for that assertion, you’re going to have to identify them, so they can be counted.

If it turns out that there are many developers who think like this, someone ought to let them know that they don’t have to package open-source software for every distro out there in order to reach all the major distros. Just package it for one, or even none, and let package maintainers do their thing.

Or, are you talking about proprietary software? That would be a different discussion.

Note that “rather undermines” does not mean “completely negates”. In any case…

30% less range for 60% less cost always makes economic sense.

Be sure to let everyone know when this new mix sells for 60% less than the current mix.

Ethanol does not prematurely dissolve seals and hoses on any car made in the last 30 years,

As far as I can tell, it’s closer to 25 years. Be sure to let everyone with an older car know when you plan to buy them an upgrade.

I get that Americans can’t do simple math,

Lots of assumption and rudeness in your comment. Please learn to be better. Goodbye.

The concern for most people is not the range of a gas tank. It’s about the fact that they’ll have to fill the tank more often, which means paying more often to travel the same distance, which rather undermines the claim of lowering the cost.

The price per mile matters more than the price per gallon.

And then there’s the additional cost of repairs when the ethanol prematurely dissolves your car’s seals and hoses.

Well, you could do this yourself too…

No, but you and someone else could collaborate to do something like it, if both of you had sufficient skill in this area.

And, importantly, it would require a great deal more time and effort.

The current laws are tuned to cost, benefit, difficulty, and volume assumptions that are made outdated by LLMs.

It seems like at worst it would be an os reinstall

It depends. Some malware would not be removed by an OS reinstall.

A few examples are mentioned here:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/03/unkillable-uefi-malware-bypassing-secure-boot-enabled-by-unpatchable-windows-flaw/

id Software, Valve and 3D Realms included their SDKs on the disk. All the way back in the 90’s they gave players the same tools they used to build the game. Any game that descends from Doom, all the way into the Source engine, store their assets in .wad files.

Those were not the first modded games.

In any case, you’ve already made it clear that you disagree. That’s fine, but it doesn’t make your view the defining one.

And it’s not just web development.

This mindset has been spreading for… probably decades. Nowadays, it is even pushed by certain popular programming languages, by including a toolchain that makes it as easy as possible to pull in third-party dependencies while offering a standard library so minimal that a developer is strongly encouraged to rely on said dependencies.

This inevitably leads to a world where software supply chain attacks have massive reach and high chances of success. And threat actors take advantage of it, of course.

Cindy Cohn (born 1964 or 1965) is an American civil liberties attorney specializing in Internet law. She has served as executive director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) since 2015.

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

From the article:

The lawsuit is backed by European consumer movement “Stop Killing Games” (SKG), which was launched in response to “The ​Crew” controversy.

Half-Life is it’s own game,

Yes, as is Counter-Strike.

modified Quake’s engine.

Yes, mod is short for modification.

The distinction you’re drawing seems pretty arbitrary to me. Early mods didn’t have the luxury of engine hooks and data separation designed for the purpose of third-party modding. They were more closely tied to the original game’s internals, and they were harder to make, but they were still mods. Even today, it’s not uncommon for mods to add features to or change behavior in an engine, via loaders or DLLs.

I suppose it’s a matter of one’s perspective.

Counter-Strike was a Half-Life mod.

And Half-Life was essentially a Quake mod. (More extensive than most mods, since the developers were able to modify the Quake source code, but a mod nevertheless.)

With or without ligatures? Without them, I think it’s essentially Fira Mono.

Response to your edit:

I am not among those who downvoted, but since you asked, I’ll offer a guess as to why so many people did:

1. The way you phrased your second sentence, it could be interpreted to mean that you consider the story to be inappropriate here. Perhaps some people (especially those who read Lemmy while in a hurry) thought that was what you meant. It could have been made more clear if you had written, “this was reported…”.

2. This story is relevant to people all over the world, while the complaint you received was that it concerns a US company. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. I believe more than a few members of this community, maybe even most, recognize that fact, and find it unacceptable for their news channel to obstruct information that concerns them just because the source happens to be in the US.

   To be clear, the rule here forbids “United States Internal News”. The rule does not forbid “News emerging from the United States”. Since the policies of a major global reference source like Wikipedia are clearly not US internal news, some community members surely recognize that flagging it for removal was inappropriate. I happen to share this view, and this is not an isolated incident.

   Once in the past, I submitted a scientific report, and it was removed here on the grounds that the scientists were in the US. The post was not “United States Internal News” and did not break any of the community’s rules. It was scientific research, without geographic or political boundaries. It was relevant to everyone. And yet it was denied visibility to us, the members here. I found that absurd, and deeply concerning: This community, which positions itself as a global information source, was filtering out information in a way that we have come to expect from state-owned media in authoritarian regimes. And it was presuming to treat scientific research as though it were somehow invalid just because it had been done in the US.

Edit:

In any case, I hope this helps you to understand some likely reasons why your comment received downvotes.

Those of us who have walked in the moderator’s shoes for long enough will come to understand that sometimes it’s the complaint that is misguided, not the target of the complaint, and that broadcasting such complaints (as you did here) gives them an air of validity that they do not deserve.