Not really. It probably got overloaded with requests and thought that another crawler was tergeting the repository so it probably bumped up the measures.
Well github is very much owned by Microsoft, and with the recent changes of the CEO there are a lot of reasons to prefer a non closed source and non-gigant-tech-corp-controlled software forge.
Tests do not account for all possible executions of the code, rather only a subset of it.
Rust is indeed a safe language, in terms of memory safety. Vulnerabilities are still very possible within a rust program, they just need to not rely on memory exploits, and the borrow checker won't catch them. That is why formal verification exists. If you have a really critical, high security application then you should ensure the maximum amount of safety and reliability.
Formal verification enables the developer to write a mathematical proof that the program behaves correctly in all situations, something that the borrow checker cannot do.
I guess apple works more as a "cultural monopoly", where if you don't own some apple device you're automatically ostracized by other apple customers. To them apple is more like a fashion clothing company like gucci than a technological one. Apple provides some sort of "privileged status" to their customers, just like purpur in ancient rome, so of course each apple stan considers themselves superior, and to keep their own privilege they need to buy more apple products.
As I've already stated, any company that may fork a similar project would actually cause more benefit than harm. KHTML died because the web started to get very complex very fast and KDE volounteers couldn't keep up with that pace, unlike Apple employees. Now that the web is a bit more stable, with less standards that are more thought-out (webassembly), it's a lot easier to maintain a web browser. So if tomorrow Microsoft hops in and announces it's intent to fork ladybird, then the latter would not only be fine, but it would probably recieve a new wave of contributors.
Sorry for my grammatical mistake, English is not my first language.
That said, my point here was that realistically no company is going to fork ladybird since there's already chromium, plus even if ladybird was somehow forked by let's say microsoft and got popular, I don't think it would be detrimental to ladybird itself, if not even beneficial, since it would attract more users and, to a lesser extent, more contributors.
Because apple themselves forked it. Only a handful of companies have the power to basically change the web browser market, and apple sure was one. Nowadays every company copies from chrome, so why would anyone bother forking ladybird?
And so? Yes people (and companies) would fork your code, but the most realistic scenario would be that the original ladybird would still be the most relevant browser of it's family, just like firefox, so the problem kinda resolves by itself