Incidentally the same labels make Gmail fundamentally incompatible with the way IMAP works causing lots of weirdness whenever you use any standard email client not specifically designed for Gmail.

Just like any game ever sold on a CD.

How does an offline installer from GOG differ from the offline installer provided on a CD/DVD?

This is equally true for almost any game ever sold, including physical ones. You only ever own a license that specifies what you can and cannot do with the game. The difference is in what this license is tied to, for example either a physical copy of a given game or an account that can be remotely deactivated taking away all your games. In GOG’s case once you grab the installer, the game license cannot be easily forcibly revoked, just as with the physical copy.

Or frontdoor checkbox for that matter, given that it’s the literal device owner that takes the action tripping their “security” tripwire.

And what do the companies take away from this? “Cool, we just won’t leave you any other options.”

Which features do you mean? Not disagreeing with you, I’m just curious.

Either multiple different keychains or even you can have no keychain-like application in your system at all.

The WiFi passwords are usually stored in /etc/NetworkManager as plain files. Granted, they are not accessible directly by non-root users as they are being managed by the NetworkManager daemon, but there is nothing generic for such a thing. Signal rolling a similar daemon for itself would be an overkill. The big desktop environments (GNOME, KDE…) usually have their own keychain-like programs that the programs provided by these environments use, but that only solves this problem for the users of these specific environments.

To me it’s perfectly expected the Signal encryption keys are readable by my user account.

There is no single keychain on Linux, and supposedly on Windows too. Signal would need to either support a few dozens of password managers or require a specific one, both options terrible in their own way. This isn’t something that can be done without making broad assumptions about the user’s system.

Oh hell no, we don’t need THREE major active conflicts!

Subsidise how? They were using their existing plan as intended and even willing ditch the grey-area parts. If CF cannot afford to offer their plans as they are, they should change the offered plans, not hunt for easy prey.

So do I, and yet I keep renting a tiny apartment for ridiculous money. Maybe I should have committed genocide instead.

It would be just as (un)popular as the Steam Machines if it wasn’t for Proton, that’s my whole point.

They already tried that in the Steam Machines era. It clearly wasn’t working.

An int& reference is just as much of a variable as int* const would be (a const pointer to a non-const int). “Variable” might be a misnomer here, but it takes just as much memory as any other pointer.

never mind, I looked it up. It’s a “reference” instead of a pointer. Similar, but unlike a pointer it doesn’t create a distinct variable in memory of its own.

I’m almost sure it does create a distinct variable in memory. Internally it’s still a pointer, specifically a const pointer (not to be confused with a pointer to a const value; it’s the address that does not change). Think about it as a pointer that is only ever dereferenced and never used as a pointer. So yes, like the other commenter said, like an alias.

Ah, so this was about melting the bottle down and making a new bottle 7 times? As opposed to washing the bottle and reusing it as it was. Makes much more sense now. :)

Why 7 specifically?

A non-American here. Can you explain why it is considered a political suicide? Do the votes like Israel so much or what?

How many email accounts do you have? It might be a huge factor. I have about 7 accounts I need to check regularly and I cannot imagine doing it manually for each. I can see it working for one or maybe two though.