Given previous more or less similar projects this is likely to get sued out of existence by Google.

Why would you not want containers managed by systemd?
You get the benefits of containerisation and you don’t have to learn the arcane syntax of some container engine or another.

My point. We don’t have code so we have to trust them blindly.

Telegram was never safe. All anyone ever had was their word that some chats are end-to-end encrypted.

In an attempt to weasel out of the liability for the woman’s death Disney’s lawyers pulled out the forced arbitration clause of the widower’s Disney+ subscription.
Meaning they’re effectively arguing that because he gives them money to use their service they should be allowed to get away with murder or at least criminal negligence.
I don’t think they’ve realised yet, what a foot-gun this argument is. On top of the obvious moral issues with this line of argument. I mean, this has “give us your firstborn” vibes.

It’s honestly disgusting.
USA says “jump” and every country goes “Yes, daddy. How high, daddy?”

That’s only useful in commit messages, issue discussions and stuff like that. Why would the devs even make that execute in source files, where it’s all but guaranteed to be a false match??

The ActivationPolicy I added in an attempt to replicate what wg-quick produces, as I recall.

Do you notice anything wrong with my config? https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/30495

Do you notice anything wrong with my config? https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/30495

You mean B?

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

That community exists on Lemmy. I think Lemmy.ml. On sh.itjust.works.