So the onus is on every individual user, to pick a random ULA prefix, bind specific addresses from it to the loopback interface, which is a different procedure for different OSes, probably requires root or elevated privileges, can have hard limits on, document it, etc. Greeeeaaaaaaat design. IPv6 gives out /64 like they’re about to turn bad, but can’t spare a /104? Gimme a break.

I can dig a hole with a spoon, too, but if someone made it so that no one was allowed to dig holes with shovels unless they build their own (and have permission to build the shovel), when previously everyone was allowed to dig with shovels, I would not think highly of that person’s wisdom.

Maybe you think G. Huston of APNIC and W. Kumari of Google don’t really know what they’re talking about?

IPv6: Fuck you, you’re only allowed one, now. Yeah, yeah, I know there are about 340 undecillion addresses in the space, but I know better than you, no one in history has ever needed to bind different services to the same port on the loopback interface, and if they did they were doing it wrong. Oh you made an RFC draft? Well I let the one from 2015 2012 expire, so good luck with your current proposal, pleb.

Caps? I’m betting they’d just block entirely, like Imgur did to the UK.

Apparently so. Neither LibreWolf nor AppImage are run by Canonical, so your choice to run unsupported software on an unsupported system is entirely on you.

LibreWolf’s site says this (emphasis mine):

Most AppImages run on recent versions of Arch Linux, CentOS, Debian, Fedora, openSUSE, Red Hat, Ubuntu, and other common desktop distributions.

Even if it is a bug, why should someone else put in more effort to fix it than you’re putting in to maintain your own system?

And you never answered the question.

Honest question, what’s keeping you on such an old version? Standard support ended over a year ago. Sure, there’s “pro” updates, but why bother if you can move to the next LTS?

So it’s fair that you are neutral about them for your own use, clearly you know what you’re doing. It doesn’t make sense to be neutral about them, generally. On usability alone they are not good. There are so many people who don’t have a clue how they work, or their consequences, and just click okay when continually harassed into using them. Some will even go ahead and save one on a shared computers, or someone else’s, ‘because the website says so’.

Placing ads between and beside such content is pretty direct profit. Look at the cat, they get paid for showing you some cat food brand.