Not really. Wikipedia is not a democracy. It would only take a handful of dedicated zionists to kick up a fuss to create the debate. The fact that it arrived at the right conclusion is a testament to Wikipedia’s editorial policies.

I don’t even think that’s remotely true.

I’ve seen two cases that actually directly impacted my ability to use Firefox. I can only presume there are many more. Those being supporting the column-span CSS property (available since 2010 in other browsers with vendor prefix, and early 2016 without, while being late 2019 for FF) and supporting iPad OS’s multi-window functionality (introduced mid 2019, Firefox has had it for just a handful of months now). I have first hand experience telling me very directly that this is true.

There’s also been a lot of talk about Firefox’s lack of support for PWAs. I’ve not experienced that myself to be able to comment more than to say I’ve noted others have complaints.

The point is that with open source you can effectively leech off of Google for now, while still retaining the flexibility to nope out and do your own thing at any point you decide.

Considering just how severely behind they are already (as I mentioned in my other comment, they’re often 3–5 years behind other browsers in implementing new web standards or operating system features), I see anything they can do to reduce how much they need to maintain independently as a good thing. In an ideal world where they had all the funding and development power they could want I might say sticking with the completely independent Firefox would be great. But that just isn’t where they’re at today.

They wouldn’t be at the mercy of anything. That’s…how open source works. If it changes in a way that breaks things for you, don’t pull that change. At that point, if the change is drastic enough to require it, you can turn that soft fork into a hard fork and hope that Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera, etc. join you; something that would significantly hamper Google’s ability to maintain their dominance of the browser engine market. That’s a choice that they simply don’t have today when being based on Firefox and Gecko means using an inferior browser platform.

Honestly I’ve been saying for some time that Mozilla’s resources would be much better spent making Firefox a soft fork of Chromium. Primarily: use the Blink browser engine and V8 JS engine, with only the changes to those that they deem absolutely necessary, and maintain a privacy-forward Chromium-based browser. Maybe try and enlist the help of Brave, Vivaldi, and other browsers that are currently Chromium but which prefer more privacy than Google offers.

It’s not zero effort, and especially as Google continues to develop Chromium with assumptions like the removal of Manifest V2 it might take some effort to maintain, but it cannot possibly be as much effort as maintaining an entire browser.

Olive oil is a deeply important cultural touchstone for Palestinians, according to a post I saw a day or two ago.

As for all those links. Absolutely irrelevant to the conversation at hand, which is about you violating instance-wide rules about respect.

You’ll note I did not report comments I merely disagreed with. I reported the ones where you were clearly violating your own instance’s rules by failing to be respectful with your interlocutor.

I agree in general, but

Maybe I’m over simplifying it though, I don’t know how their org operates.

This is exactly why just sticking to the 90 day standard is better. For the supposed security researcher it’s a CYA move at worst.

Maccas HQ should take the guy’s franchise off of him, then. They did it near me to a guy whose only crime was supporting the local community more than extracting maximum profit, surely making a political endorsement that HQ doesn’t agree with should be grounds for the same. Right‽

90 days is just the standard timeframe for responsible disclosure. And normally that’s just a baseline with additional time being given if there’s genuine communication going on and signs they’re addressing the problem.

Yup. Clear violation of the rules.

They’re known specifically for being pro-Russia, which is what made the comment amusing.

If they were really “the hero”, they’d follow the bare minimum of responsible disclosure best practices, and allow 90 days between privately alerting them of the issue and going public with it. Two weeks is absurd.

I can’t think of any video game that fits that description. But I wish I got into RPGs earlier. My first role playing experience was near the end of my first year of uni. I wish I could have played D&D or other RPGs from when I was in high school. They’re such a blast.

Lemmy uses for its markup a language called “markdown”. It’s the same one used on Reddit, Stack Exchange, as well as in a modified form on Discord.

Markdown requires two line breaks to define a new paragraph to allow you to break your paragraphs across multiple lines, a useful ability to have with writing that’s going to be tracked by Git, or displayed on some old-school text editors. It also gives you the ability to separate between two paragraphs
and one paragraph with a line break in it.
Which is a useful thing to be able to do in some circumstances, like when writing poetry, or sharing your results in !dailygames@lemmy.zip. To enter a “line break”, end a line with two spaces and then press enter only once.

Cadbury Bubbly does it too, though sadly I haven’t seen any of it on shelves (apart from the mint variant, eww) for a few years.

Every one of Innuendo Studio’s videos are absolutely excellent.

Why would you say something so controversial yet so brave?

Oh I see, interesting. I guess they’re named after the fact that normally they’re at a restaurant?

The Wikipedia article was…interesting. The first paragraph of the “history” section seemed like someone had removed a sentence at random. “After that initial meeting”, without ever having described any first meeting, but having set the stage where such a first meeting might take place. If someone has knowledge & sources about that first meeting, that’d be a great opportunity to improve Wikipedia.