They could easily request bad advice, then change the content of the search bar before taking a screenshot.

Didn’t think so.

Do you know the difference between “says” and “asks”?

Are you having a seizure?

Now you’re just repeating your idiocy. Are you a politician?

There you go again, not thinking before commenting. It just makes you say stupid things.

You should consider thinking about what people say before responding. It will probably lead to improved understanding and more relevant replies on your part.

And several of them are here ITT saying that the browser is sketchy.

The company was founded and is headed by a homophobic anti-vaxxer. Plus, the browser is not secure and has been involved in several controversies in the oast for things like selling user data and running a crypto scam.

There aren’t any square brackets.

The form “function(){content}” in bash defines a function called “function” that, when called by name, executes “content”. This forkbomb defines a function called : (just a colon) which calls itself twice in a new subprocess (the two colons inside the curly brackets). It thus spawns more and more copies of itself until it overwhelms your processor.

It’s because if you think you’re gay and kiss the same gender then discover you weren’t actually gay, you become tainted forever and upon death your soul turns into a cold sore in someone’s mouth instead of going to the Promised Land to play the harp with everyone else. Or something that makes about as much sense as that.

You’re absolutely correct. Some people “just know” and stay thay way, some “just know” and change, and some take a while to find out. There is absolutely no reason why that should be a problem.

My brother knew he wanted to be a doctor when he was five and he stuck with it. I’m 36 and I still wonder if I chose the right profession. Why is this considered normal for what you want to work with but not who you want to be with?

Thank you, dear madam or sir!

If they call it a “sale” rather than a “licensing” then I consider myself entitled to remove the DRM (which I do to all my Kindle ebooks, for example) or to download a cracked copy for archiving (which I do to some games I wish to keep, if I haven’t bought them on GOG or another DRM-free platform). Common sense and ethics dictate that I am in my right to do this.

If companies are relying on a technicality - an obscure one to the general public, even though techies have been aware of this issue for over a decade - to hoodwink people and charge actual-purchase prices for mere licensing, then I am relying on the implicit tenets of morality, good faith and common sense to bypass their malicious and bad faith distortions. Artificial scarcity be fucked, I paid what they claim is a fair price for what they claim is the purchase of a digital good, so I shall treat it with Animus Domini just as I do with any physical purchase. This includes lending to others as per the First Sale doctrine.

The fact that the seller consciously chose to contradict themselves, calling it a purchase out in the open and a licensing deal in the fine print, should it ever work to someone’s disadvantage, should obviously be to the disadvantage of the person who intentionally made the blunder, not to good faith third parties. This is a well-established principle of legal ethics and Civil Law which is adopted by legal scholars the world over. Whether or not they have failed to apply it to these specific cases is wholly irrelevant to its validity, and I apply it to my own dealings with a perfectly clear conscience.

I legally purchase all my media, and I will use any and all means necessary to protect my good faith acquisitions, including those which are incontroversially illegal for those who have not purchased that piece of media, such as downloading cracked software, because this is simply done to remedy an inexcusable omission on the part of those who claim to have sold me a copy of that software but don’t provide me with the possibility to archive my copy locally. So long as these transactions are referred to openly as purchases, sales, etc. I shall continue to act in this way to enforce their overt nature over the malicious mischaracterization contained in their licensing.

In other words, slimeballs, have the guts to call it licensing and renting. Until you do, I and many like me will continue to make your lies come true and there is realistically nothing you can do to stop us.

I don’t use the feature, so I’m not aware if it’s supported.

Why tf are you using GOG Galaxy under Bottles when Lutris is better than Bottles in every single way and integrates directly with your GOG account, meaning you don’t need GOG Galaxy at all? This is like pulling the handbrake on your car and pushing it uphill instead of turning it on and driving it, in terms of how needlessly difficult you’re making things for yourself.

+1 for Dropout, - 1000 for YouTube Premium

Termux has been a thing for years.

privacy these days is really hard to achieve

Which is exactly why claims like this should be backed with evidence.

Unsourced claims like this do absolutely no good to anyone, ever. Which means that either right before typing this comment, you though to yourself “time to be a bad person for no good reason” or you’re a shill for some surveillance agency with an interest in scaring people away from privacy enhancing solutions.