> theres some questionable quality content in the book, but lets be fair 4.5k pages is hard to manage.

Could you be more specific? Maybe open an issue listing points for possible improvement?

What are the perceived issues?

And homunculi such as Mark Zuckerberg.

Time flies! Two years already since that video.[0] Anyway, to answer your question: He's a billionaire.

[0] https://redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=FZeB7SwmkiQ

"KeePassXC asks us to be skeptical of them if we are skeptical of LLMs.[0] This is a convincing argument. A password manager doesn't need 300 regular contributors armed with 14 LLMs; it just needs to do its job, be stable, and be ported to Qt 6 already.

"We are a small group of engineers with extensive open source maintenance and information security experience, and we forked KeePassχ from KeePassXC 2.7.10, the last release before the advent of the LLM policy linked above. We like using a robust, secure, and trustworthy password manager, so that's what we'll focus on. Anything on top of that is a bonus."

[0] https://keepassxc.org/blog/2025-11-09-about-keepassxcs-code-...

He created a throwaway account to ask the question without linking his profile to his identity, slipped and replied with the main account, then ran damage control.

I hope he'll take from that he isn't very good at the Jason Bourne stuff and, as "it takes one to know one," seek further confirmation about who paid a visit to his place.

I'm sorry, I really do think you should let the police handle the "who was that guy" angle before moving on to the technical one. It would take more than "drove a Mediacom truck, showed an ID and knew my address" before I concluded the guy Mediacom has no record of sending, and whose behavior violates their policy (and common sense), absolutely must have been either Mediacom or Jason Bourne.

Mark Zuckerberg and such?

Yes, it's called voting with your wallet. They are better at it that you or I presumably.

Voting with your wallet doesn't exist. Try to boycott Amazon by blocking the AWS IP ranges and see how unusable the internet becomes for everyday tasks. Corporations continue to push the personal responsibility narrative so they can externalize costs of unethical business practices.

how are you making them lose money by blocking their ip ranges? Your are pretty much giving them money because now they dont need to pay for bandwidth.

By not giving their customers business. Unfortunately I am forced to interact with their customers (i.e. governments, schools, utilities, etc.).

Dollars speak louder than ballots.

Posts such as yours — "most jews..." — help push forward the narrative that anyone critical of them is antisemitic.

> And the US could easily just keep destroying every asset in Iran

Could — and even more so: could easily — in an "if ifs and buts..." sense or materially? Wouldn't they run (weren't they running) out of resources? And having reached the point in which progressing with the destruction of assets requires killing the people encircling those buildings, standing on those bridges, wouldn't a new leadership be committed to revenge nevertheless?