Unless you can identify exactly where the issue is and fix it, reporting it and letting the developers and packagers figure it out is the best way to go. If you choose the wrong project, they'll tell you.
It doesn't look too far fetched from their point of view, they saw a payment failure and they may have assumed that you decided to stop paying and didn't bother to send a cancellation request.
It looks like you had your own backup, which is always a good idea, hopefully you were able to restore your data elsewhere.
> Also the arguments regarding colorblind crowd being unable to distinguish colors are weak, as accessibility best practices suggest to convey semantically relevant markup and content in multiple sensory means, so that everybody has their chance to understand it (e.g. setting links in a distinguished color and underlined).
It's not color blindness, it's lack of basic testing in real-world conditions where not everyone can use dark-themed terminals.
The default colors in Debian's 'ls' output, or 'ncdu', blend perfectly with a light background theme, so the net result is a loss of information for the user.
I'm using terminals with dark background and often suffer from programs using dark blue which is hard to distinguish from the background (even with changes in terminal settings to make it less dark). So at least some by default expect light background. Vim being one of them (I have to keep COLORFGBG='default;default;0' in environment for it).
vim predates the fashion for dark backgrounds, so it gets it wrong for a different subset of people. Try `set background=dark` in your .vimrc.
(I believe neovim uses the DCS 11 inquiry to determine the actual background colour on xterm-compatibles. I believe vim currently does not, relying on environment variables only. I may be stale or otherwise mistaken on both.)
The “natural” background for text is light though. Hard to find books, newspapers, or magazines that put a dark background behind text of any significant length.
Accordingly, the Xerox Alto had a light background too, back in the 1970s. Demonstrated here with Smalltalk:
What little actual research exists suggests dark on light is more readable for people with normal vision. People with cataracts benefit from light on dark, and people with astigmatism benefit from dark on light.
Light background for books IMHO is no more natural than dark background for old CRT displays - both are what works best for a given medium: while making dark paper is not harder than light one, it is hard to make a pencil or ink which would be clearly visible on black paper (white markers do exists but they are a recent invention). Blackboard and chalk where natural until we got plastic whiteboards and easy to erase markers.
Modern screens are more or less unique in not limiting background colors so we can use any and and argue which one is better.
Actually there is at least one more common media where we can freely choose between dark and light (at least in the last 100+ years) - guide signs on roads. Both options are common (e. g. white on green/blue and black on white). But even if there are studies showing which background is better for signs it is not necessary the same for a computer screen: road sign should be legible from a maximum distance under variety of conditions - from a sunny day to LED lighting at nigh or heavy rain. Legibility is the main design goal. Computers on other hand are usually used in an environment where we can control lighting to some degree and a distance is fixed. Legibility is important but comfort is important as well (choose of colors should minimize eye strain / fatigue in case if it can affect this).
Close, the giant tech companies may or may not comply but they surely can afford the fines that the various EU Data Protection authorities dream into reality by twisting an ever-changing body of interpretation of ambiguously written rules.
I'm dreading the redesign, even though at the moment I have no idea of how it will look like.
What webmail can one use to read and write mail for multiple accounts? I will need to have a sort of unified inbox for at least 5-6 accounts, and to see the folders of all those accounts in the same window.
I made some noise on Reddit about the Splunk one and I didn't receive anything else after a quick exchange with them, I reported the SublimeText one but a couple of years later I got other spam to this address, and I didn't bother doing anything with the Canva one.
I haven't had any major issue with Firefox's UI lately, as long as they can let me show the menu bar.
However, the scrollbars since v98 are a big issue, they no longer follow the system UI (I'm using KDE Plasma on Fedora) and sometimes they take the same color as the web page background, making them invisible. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be an alternative other than the n-th Chromium-based browser.
OVH SBG1, SBG2 and SBG3 were all at:
Rue du Bassin de l'Industrie, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
The addendum to that document says is only related to activities
on the sites mentioned. The address Rue du Bassin de l'Industrie,
67000 Strasbourg is listed, so sounds like they have now addressed
the issues.
IP addresses are PII when they can identify a person, and that's not always the case, e.g. a company network using NAT for outgoing connections so that dozens, if not hundreds of people appear from the same IP address.
There's no way you can make that decision, which is why the simplest course of action, or the less risky one, is to treat any IP address as it actually conveyed PII, even 192.168.0.1.
