Because the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is for copyright. You haven't stated how the blog post infringes upon BK's copyright at all, so... yes, seems like a standard fraudulent DMCA claim.

> First thing first. This is NOT DMCA abuse. The DMCA is the only way to communicate with web companies and take down content. As such, it has become the legitimate way to take down any content that needs to be taken down, in the absence of alternatives.

This assumes that companies should be able to take down any content they do not like. This is very much not the case. The DMCA is very specifically only for copyrighted content.

From copyright.gov[1]:

> To be effective, a notice must contain substantially the following information:

> ...

> (v) a statement that the person sending the notice has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and

> (vi) a statement that the information in the notice is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the person sending the notice is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner .

This is pretty clearly DMCA abuse. TFA isn't using any of BK's copyrighted content, which is what a DMCA claim alleges. Just because people have abused the form... pretty much since inception does not mean that it's not perjury to do so.

If BK wants to press charges for unauthorized usage of computer systems, that's another route. This would involve a police report, not perjury, and would probably not take down the website.

[1]: https://www.copyright.gov/512/

- The first thing on the "features" list should be something that other compilers cannot do. Esthetics (maybe just say "DX"?) is a nice to have - sometimes VERY nice to have - but should not be positioned as the most important item.

As the original post says the alternatives have poor ESM support - that's a good differentiator.

- Even though ES Modules are part of the ECMAScript standard, having a header stating "(Partial) Support for ECMAScript"- to me, at least - indicates the project does not support base JS features, not that ESM imports have problems. Maybe say "improved ESM support"?

- Docs seem a little bare. For example, the Usage section says:

    # Preinstall Node.js on the target machine
    astra install

Also, no mention of binary limitations in actual docs, despite mention in post.

Hopefully this does not come off as discouraging - this looks like a good project.

https://github.com/aaronraimist/DontFuckWithPaste/blob/8cb68...

     View your email
     Add and remove items in Your Library
    Create, edit, and follow private playlists
    Create, edit, and follow playlists
    Manage who you follow on Spotify
    Stream and control Spotify on your other devices

    Element.scrollIntoView({ behavior: 'smooth' });

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35703789

- "Text content does not match server-rendered HTML."

- "Hydration failed because the initial UI does not match what was rendered on the server."

- "There was an error while hydrating. Because the error happened outside of a Suspense boundary, the entire root will switch to client rendering."

None of these should impact the videos, though, because the fallback (client-side rendering) should work too. So if that's causing the issue, it's because there's a larger problem enabling it.