vaguerant

Sounds like he was hoping to compete.

In this case, the goose didn't even need numbers. The eagle eventually gave up the fight and flew away. Something something, don't start a fight you can't finish.

Only if you do it anonymously at some kind of blood donor glory hole.

It goes beyond just cracking, with support for features like SponsorBlock and Return YouTube Dislike, but essentially yes. It's not a meaningful YouTube "alternative", just a tweaked version of same.

The Leta FAQ confirms this:

Did you make your own search engine from scratch? We did not, we made a front end to the Google and Brave Search APIs.

Our search engine performs the searches on behalf of our users. This means that rather than using Google or Brave Search directly, our Leta server makes the requests.

Searching by proxy in other words.

My guess is that there's a bot (or very bored person) monitoring a few major communities and they just DM everybody who posts there. I took a bit of a break from social media a while ago and the first time I commented after that, two fediverse chick DMs. Seems like they are responding to activity.

Yeah, I keep seeing that phrasing used everywhere and it bothers me, too. I'm pretty sure it's not accurate to the UK system either: they have a standard parliamentary setup like most of Europe where the party or coalition of parties who earn a majority of the seats is able to form government, which most people would consider to be what winning an election means. I'm not well-versed in the history of UK parliament, but it may just be that the situation has never occurred there, so they're unfamiliar with it?

Before continuing, I want to specify that I'm agreeing with you but clarifying the situation because there is a business interest involved here.

The Mozilla Foundation is a non-profit with several wholly-owned, for-profit business subsidiaries, most notably the Mozilla Corporation. The Corporation markets and distributes several Mozilla products, including the Firefox browser, as well as its other commercial ventures like Pocket. The corporate subsidiaries' profits do get returned to the owner of those businesses, which is the Foundation.

I would replace that "aggregated and anonymized" with an and/or, as that is consistent with the language in Mozilla's privacy policy. The distinction is fairly important because de-anonymizing user data is a practice of its own and exactly what it sounds like.

Now, is the data which Mozilla "shares with" (sells to) its partners anonymized reliably enough that the identity of the person it relates to can never be rediscovered? Granting Mozilla the benefit of the doubt, if it is sufficiently anonymous today, could future developments lead to de-anonymization of that data at a later date? This could include leaks, cyber-attacks directed at Mozilla, AI-assisted statistical analysis of bulk data, etc.

I think somebody has misunderstood a comment made by Zelenskyy at the International Summit on the Support of Ukraine, held this February just passed. Zelenskyy said:

We remember that Russia has violated the ceasefire more than 25 times since 2014.

Zelenskyy is talking about the ceasefire which formed part of the Minsk agreements. Representatives from both Ukraine and Russia signed these agreements, with the final protocol's first point being:

1. To ensure an immediate bilateral ceasefire.

This is the ceasefire agreement which Russia has violated. That is to say, there haven't been 20 separate ceasefire agreements, there was one which Zelenskyy told the Summit Russia had violated more than 25 times.

Yeah, those are almost exclusively Firefox contributors. e.g. Emilio Cobos Álvarez is a Gecko engineer at Mozilla, moz-wptsync-bot is a bot Mozilla uses to sync web platforms tests, Ryan VanderMeulen is the Firefox release manager at Mozilla.

Since their commits show up in the Waterfox commit log, they are Waterfox contributors, but only because it's a fork and they contributed to the upstream project, Firefox.

LibreWolf and IceCat aren't on GitHub (officially), so I'm guessing it's just a difference in how different code trackers report contributors in forks or something.

Just to compare, Waterfox has over 5000 contributors.

I am 100% certain that this count includes Firefox contributors, not direct contributors to Waterfox. None of the Firefox forks are massive projects with contributors into the thousands. I would expect Waterfox to have a similar number of dedicated contributors to the others.