jjplace/jjhub/codetown, whatever. Doesn't matter.

Names don't matter that much for brands. Names just have to be simple enough to remember (ideally two syllables or less). What the heck does Nike mean, for example? Boeing is just someone's name. Microsoft is just two words smashed together. A brand's name literally doesn't matter.

People should stop using it as a synonym, then. The Latin effectively means "after death", meaning its a poor synonym for "what happened wrong recently".

Not until a court case on the topic gives us precedent.

Shortening the animation to minimum was not sufficient for my preference.

Yes. I know its more than firefox, but I don't have the full list. On 24.04:

  me@comp:~$ apt info firefox | head -n 5
  
  WARNING: apt does not have a stable CLI interface. Use with caution in scripts.
  
  Package: firefox
  Version: 1:1snap1-0ubuntu7
  Priority: optional
  Section: web
  Origin: Ubuntu
  me@comp:~$

I argue that open sourcing your work is no more liable than making a comment on social media. The biggest risk to an open source maintainer is publicly losing their patience and/or being heterodox in their beliefs. Code isn't a requirement for that to happen.

While I generally agree with the technical argument, I fail to see the threat model here. Is it that some external threat would have prior knowledge that an important target is in close proximity to a less hardened one? It doesn't seem viable to me for nation states to spend the expensive R&D to compromise hobbyist-adjacent services in a hope that they can discover more valuable data on the host hypervisor.

Once such expensive malware is deployed, there's a huge risk that all the R&D money is spent on potentially just reconnaissance.

In non-coding social circles, social proof is even more accepted. So, I think that for a large portion of codebases, social proof is enough.

I have this feeling with most things that are not the "default", especially when I think of getting new tools adopted into a conservative workplace.