If you've installed RealActualBankApp (with the ID of real.actual.bank.app) once (from whatever source!) then there cannot be another app installed with that same id but signed with a different public key (oversimplified version of the story, there is a key rollover scheme).
You can however install an imposter app that's also called RealActualBankApp, with the same icon. It'll need to go by a different ID.
So then we're down to the same problem, or pseudo-problem, of identity confusion, as we have for banking website URLs. Where is the ID/URL shown, and does the user know that it should be mybank.com and not mybank-incorporated.com ?
Wear on the chain is greatly increased though on a 1x12 versus a 2x10, because of alignment.
Tolerances on a 1x setup are also much tighter, not ideal for long distance cycletrekking adventures.
Also, with a front derailer, dropping the chain to a smaller cog in the front to get to a lighter gear results in much happier shifting than having to lift the chain to a larger cog on the rear derailer when going uphill.
When MTB racing you can really get some advantage out of shifting combination discipline using a front derailer, when going from a downhill into an uphill.
I'm sad it's hard to find a 2x setup on new bicycles nowadays :-/
> "The victim" of using a certain operating system? Please.
Perhaps "victim" in the sense of not having much choice/agency? Neither in the choice of operating system (due to sparsely restrained anticompetitive behaviour of incumbents over decades) nor in how they're treated (entrapped) by the operating systems. The OSes are really POS (point of sale) terminals for media and cloud services.
Thus consider most operating system users aren't really users. They're "usees", they're being used. One could surmise that the Microsoft/Apple/Google shareholders are the real users of the operating systems.
If you'd left the commercial OS world in the Win2K/OSX 10.4 era for, say, Gentoo Linux, and would come back now to look over someone's shoulder while they're using (or rather, being used by) their operating systems, you could be forgiven for coming away with the impression that some kind of authority inversion has taken place in the meantime.
Yeah, so, it's not injecting? To inject something into X, X needs to exist. X does not exist yet when execve is set up.
I'm not being pedantic. I just want to read about injection when I'm promised injection :-) because that'd be technically interesting for me. Plainly calling execve isn't so much, I have the manpage here already :-)
Offer services for free (eg cross-subsidized by another business arm) in order to carve out a gigantic kingdom with millions of users, smothering any competition (only few use an indie email provider when there's "free" email, only few try to make a stand not using Whatsapp in whatsapp-saturated locales), and... Congratulations, now you've become too big too fail! And now you'll be treated as such. You're a critical part of society's functioning, and are to be regulated as such. Whether by accident, whether intentionally, whether it's because you're simply awesomely innovative or maybe you just massively cross-subsidized from another business branch, is irrelevant.
Once market capture has reached a certain point, yes, you need a physical grievance office, with state-backed arbitration/escalation. For instance.
Maybe you also can't just change the TOS anymore just like that, making people choose between coordinating a hasty move of the families' 4 TB of photos to... ? and being slowly boiled while $BIGBOY AI-trains on the family photos.
As a big boy, don't like this kind of regulation? Just shrink by selling off some business arms. Or stop hooking people by giving out "free" stuff. Or maybe don't base your growth strategy on gatekeepership and moats.
I surmise that big rules for big boys (while not burdening small players, thus, differential legislation) will actually massively help competition and innovation. But even if it doesn't — government, by the people, for the people, should get the final say in how we let citizens be treated. People with beating hearts over emotionless corps, always.
From memory from working with these a couple of years ago:
Firefox extension asset URLs are random and long (there's a UUID in there iirc). The extension itself can discover its randomized base so that it can output its asset URLs, but webpage code can't.
Use fans. They don't like flying around in wind and they don't know where to fly to anymore because the fan disperses the CO2 you produce so quickly that there's no gradient for them to follow to the source (you).
There's GeckoView which one'd use for embedding Firefox in an Android app. Can't use that on Sailfish OS of course, but it'd help in figuring out what of core Firefox to bind to to make a similar layer.
If you've installed RealActualBankApp (with the ID of real.actual.bank.app) once (from whatever source!) then there cannot be another app installed with that same id but signed with a different public key (oversimplified version of the story, there is a key rollover scheme).
You can however install an imposter app that's also called RealActualBankApp, with the same icon. It'll need to go by a different ID.
So then we're down to the same problem, or pseudo-problem, of identity confusion, as we have for banking website URLs. Where is the ID/URL shown, and does the user know that it should be mybank.com and not mybank-incorporated.com ?