I don’t mind it either, they need some way to finance the development. However I wish they would make packs of older DLCs and sell those cheaper.

For example in Europa Universalis IV you need a whole bunch of DLC, and buying seven 5 year old DLCs for full price is just not very appealing. Sure, you can try and wait for sales but they are not always available when you want to get them.

No, the main point of standing desk is that whoever has one talks about them all day, every day. At least, that was my experience 10-15 years ago, which was the last time I spent in an office.

Subscription based teeth?

Accidents have minor consequences compared to GTA IV.

I agree with you I much prefered the driving in 4 over any other that I can remember. However, one really weird thing was that sometimes you could hit a curb at relatively low speed and you would fly through the windshield. Other times you were totally indestructable.

For every FFF we are moving closer to bob & angels

And if it succesful, or at least passenger doesn’t boycott them over it, it is just a question of time until other airlines adds it as well

That is still source code, obfuscated but still source code.

Counting in lines of code is the most stupid metric.

It works quite fine, use it daily. Well, XMMS2 to be pedantic.

Just some shellscripts bound to windows-keys to pause/play and load new files.

The question is whether x86 is even relevant anymore

Also RISC-V, though that is probably a few years away at least.

That seems to be the general atmosphere, “leaving money”. They probably analysed it and thought it wasn’t worth the effort. Companies like to make money after all.

You still need to keep supporting it for future releases, make sure it actually works and not just builds, test, update QA pipeline, tell support, etc etc

You are getting downvoted by people that have no idea how software development and maintence works.

Every feature cost. More than most people realise. Both in development time and to maintain it over time and releases. It all adds up, not saying EA are correct in not supporting it. But to think it is free is just incorrect.

They made a business decision to not support it. We think it is the wrong decision, but it is ultimately theirs to make.

He could have handled it better. But he didn’t call the code crap directly, just the bundle of everything.

Having a meta package and let users choose seems like the best way. But this is a Debian issue, and not a keepassxc issue. It is up to Debian to package it anyway they want.

Exactly. And if you want those features, you install the full version. Packages can break in sid, that is the whole point of it.

I am also running sid and keepassxc and I see no problem with this change. In fact it seems like a very sane thing to do, and something I wished more packages did.

It is still just a “trust us” deal. They say they have deleted it, and all you can do is trust them. They could possibly get into legal troubles if it was shown they were lying, but that could be easily avoided as well.

GDPR is ok, but much of it is based on good actors doing what they should.

now that IPv6 has been adopted globally.

Now that is a quality joke

Security is hard. Especially at the scale of those companies. Since they are big, they get a lot more hacking attempts. Makes more sense for bad actors to attack someone with millions of customers than your mom & pop store that might have hundreds, if everything being equal.

More and more people and compa ies wants to store things “in the cloud”, (read: someone else’s server). It is for the most part a good thing as it makes it easier to access, but it also opens up bigger and other attack vectors.

So, I think the number of breeches will only increase. Not always because the companies have bad security (though sometimes it is 100% that), but also because the attack vectors keep growing due to changed business decisions and user preferences.

Why not just go full WSL?

I think a better, but still not perfect, way to define it would be “This person wants to do X, but can’t support him/her/itself doing it.”

Of course, if you are already rich it doesn’t matter and then it is a bad metric (one of the reasons it isn’t perfect.) However, I think it is a better way to define it. Someone writing a few books as a hobby and then stops are not a failed writer, but someone that wants to be a writer but just can’t support it is.

Basically I think the intent matters, but that is impossible to measure (and people lie about it). So being able to do it as a profession is an ok metric.