Well then, that would be a very interesting thing to watch when it happens!

From the article, the penalty for a false report:

> ...shall be punished by one year’s imprisonment and a fine of €15,000.

Side note, would anybody know how "easily" do political elites get off the hook in France?

Many commenters are implying that there is a security issue here, and that I'm putting everyone in danger. That is quite frankly a pretty absurd claim to just casually make. I'm of course very curious to hear more details on what the security risk here actually would be?

Do you think I'm reading/writing sensitive data to/from subdomain-wide cookies?

Also, yes, the PSL is a great tool to mitigate (in practice eliminate) the problem of cross-domain cookies between mutually untrusting parties. But getting on that list is non-trivial and they (voluntary maintainers) even explicitly state that you can forget getting on there before your service is big enough.

I have no idea, but a wild guess is that with old hardware the "hot" pixel that could trigger the collision interrupt was fixed to the upper left corner of the hardware sprite.

EDIT: Another thought that crossed my mind is that with very lo-res screens a corner is the only way to get a well defined and sharp (yet fairly wide) arrowhead. The trade-off would be the shaft being pixelated, but the tip is more important.

(Founder) we wanted to be able to capture questions on each page of our docs - so someone learning about our JS SDK (for example) could see questions about it under the main docs content, to try to avoid people missing gotchas.

In general we invest a ton in the website as we don’t do sales - it is our sales team!

And in future we anticipated building ie merch rewards for people that answer questions, people about to submit blog posts and stuff all through the same login… community based things. This is all pie in sky at moment but we’re going to experiment with it.

I think that's a little too reductive—foo.txt wasn't a real app.

Nonetheless, I agree with your broad point: that if somebody can use it under the GPL, they can redistribute it and then all those downstream users can use it under the GPL.

But I disagree there is anything to fix. It's copyleft FOSS but businesses are encouraged to buy a license. Everybody wins.

IANAL, but I'm wondering if this license really is GPL3? Because it's like a modified version of it - "GPL3 with a condition". From there, that possibly non-GPL3 license says that you can "use" the software, but not redistribute it.

But anyway it sounds like he needs to decide what he wants, and that's probably a non-open source license, if he doesn't want commercial use.

You could be right. I don’t know.