Based on the only information we have, OPs sister is two. So the sister is 2. Trivial.

They’re both copyleft so no chance of a rug pull.

That’s not accurate. It also takes an absence of a cla (Contributor License Agreement) transfering ownership of patches and a diverse set of major contributors to develop that protection.
GPL protects against outside entities taking over a project via a fork, owners are always free to change the license of what they made.

I didn’t see a cla on either libreoffice online nor onlyoffice, but you would have to contribute some actual changes to see you don’t need to agree to anything and they will accept your contributions without rewriting them later.

In comparison for example audacity makes you transfer rights over code contributions to them. That means they could make audacity closed source at any time and any version from that point would be proprietary. Would they not force contributors to sign that cla, and instead go with a copyleft contribution license, then with going closed source they would violate the licenses under which they use all these contributions.

Basically distributed ownership prevents rug pulls, since ownership beats license restrictions. So you have to check that a project has spread out ownership (independend major contributions) connected by copyleft licenses (standard unless overridden by a (non copyleft) cla)

Every user of that spotify beta was a leech and spotify was the only seeder for all of them.
The meta defense only works if you make an llm output a more or less corrupted version of your warez.

Search for firefox-tou.
The presence of that now magically removes mentions of privacy and not selling user-data in multiple places.

-    <p>
-        Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.
-    </p>

+    {% if switch('firefox-tou') %}
+      <p>Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.</p>
+    {% else %}
+      <p>Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.</p>
+    {% endif %}

Difference here is Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data.

-    <h2 class="c-section-title">The best privacy</h2>
+    {% if switch('firefox-tou') %}
+      <h2 class="c-section-title">Always protected</h2>
+    {% else %}
+      <h2 class="c-section-title">The best privacy</h2>
+    {% endif %}

Pivoting from privacy to security in the tos.

-      <li>
-        <h2>{{ ftl('does-firefox-sell') }}</h2>
-        <p>{{ ftl('nope-never-have', url=url('privacy')) }}</p>
-      </li>
+      {% if not switch('firefox-tou') %}
+        <li>
+          <h2>{{ ftl('does-firefox-sell') }}</h2>
+          <p>{{ ftl('nope-never-have', url=url('privacy')) }}</p>
+        </li>
+      {% endif %}

As you mentioned they will apparently sell your data under tos.

Where does the tos apply and where the mpl now?
They would have removed all those mentions of privacy entirely if the mpl had no use anymore, wouldn’t they?

.software seems quite expensive (and long to type).
njalla offers registering .software domains, so I would recommend them.

Probably only sucessful ones.
Google captchas have had multiple rounds (with it faking you out claiming you failed) for probably a decade. Every round of the game updates some confidence score which if you get it high enough lets you pass.
This conversely means there is no way to fail, you just get stuck in an infinite loop of challenges if your score doesn’t get high enough.

The only other alternative means of pricing it would see even valid users consume way more than one “verification” per actual completed captcha, since so many users have low enough scores to need multiple rounds of captcha even when completing them with perfect accuracy.
I doubt they do this, but if they do it’s a scandal waiting to happen, besides also being very weird for any kind of statistic google certainly offers for their captcha.

Everything else about it is great. It seems a lot more reliable and light weight compared to yt, and the easy way to make videos offline-available is nice too.
If I could just add my dedicated mix-algorithm-gaming account and use that to get access to mixes (which google locked behind a login requirement some years ago) this would be perfect.

Sadly the automatic songpicker does not work for my usecase.
The only thing I have seen work correctly without dumping me into a non-music video after 3 steps are mixes, which this app does not appear to use.
So it’s still revanced for me.

The kde default explorer dolphin does.
It creates them at the root of separate partitions (or maybe only network mounts).
Basically as a fallback to moving it slowly into a local trash.

You probably have the system mounted elsewhere and are accessing it remotely with dolphin would be my guess.

Last time I encountered it I found no good solution, it’s very anyoing.
Best workaround is to create a file of the same name as the folder, that way at least it stays empty.

Needs a none option for base

Contributors rights are being violated then. This would only be legal if ownership over contributions was transferred via a CLA (Contributor License Agreement).

It doesn’l look like they have one even now (look at audacity for example which do have one), so I assume they had no CLA prior to this and every contributors rights are being violated by including their code in a closed license project.

There could naturally also be deals made with contributors to sign over those rights, there have been projects in the past that got enough developers to sign their contributions over and rewrote the rest. Doubt this makes sense for a medium-scale project like this tho.

They probably mean forwardable ports, i.e. have isp-related problems with hosting servers.
Syncthing doesn’t need you to host a server, it can hole-punch right through the worst cgnats.

Might also be intermittent syncing only when ops machine is running.

Fixed a mediawiki maintenance script via a 2 char change last week.

stage3-amd64-systemd-20220904T170535Z.tar.xz

If that is true, how does the brain work?

Call everything you have ever experienced the finite dataset.
Constructing your brain from dna works in a timely manner.
Then training it does too, you get visibly smarter with time, so on a linear scale.