OpenBSD isn't trying anything along those lines. The author is. Your statement comes off as an odd and disingenuous conflation. They are just file system attributes shared alike with Linux and a few other operating systems.

If I learned anything from fighting with MicroPython on far more powerful "limited environments" it would be that this is just a curious study, not a feasible choice.

This isn't MicroPython though, and it's not similar either.

I fail to see how it is dissimilar enough to avoid apprehension. Same language (Python) on limited hardware (8-bit NES, microcontrollers.) So what makes pyNES so different from MicroPython that someone with apprehension due to the latter should have no apprehension toward the former?

Wheras micropython involves running a lightweight python virtual machine, this is a compiler. It parses a subset of python and emits assembly, which then can be run on the NES.

It is sort of like a scheme to asm dsl, but rather than via macros, this appears to operate via decorators.

For future reference, though it may be unintended, the tone of your comments does seem aggressive. This probably wouldn't be a problem if they weren't so assertively wrong/misguided.

There is no python runtime running on the 6502 hardware, and no Python semantics at runtime whatsoever. Python code is only executed on the host system during compilation. Python's role here is a glorified macro assembler.

Because this is an assembler with python being used as the macro language. No actual python code runs on the target.

Please expand, thanks.

As do theirs ;)

I have high hopes Ladybird will remain truly neutral and avoid any infringement on user integrity/privacy. Please never let the money dictate.

The tutorial is really thorough.

Maybe it's that I'm not rested right now but I find it hard to follow this train of thought because your reasoning is kinda wide, lofty and out there but I think OP means that it's irrational to throw Bill Gates entirely to the side based only on -another person- he associated with. Like how picky and fussy people refuse to touch something clean and unspoiled just because it sat next to something else that happened to be gross and smelly. I know it's clean but eww, icky. That kind of guilt by association.

Epstein's lawyers and his realtor, his tailor and his golf partners also associated with him but they don't appear at all to be desirable targets to debase with the same treatment and that's probably because they aren't rich or powerful or influential. And I'm certain that's what's tripping you. It's not just OK but maybe even preferential and encouraged by you to take a dump on certain people when a tiny vague chance presents itself only because the person is powerful.

I found this earlier comment from you on this topic which is a bit funny given your statement. To me youre kinda describing yourself.

  HN is pretty divided about Stallman. Bringing up the things he actually at one
  time said, even if later he said something different, results in a lot of
  downvoting and toxicity. You can't talk about him without it devolving into
  binary thinking and binary debates. Same as everything else in 2023 I guess.

> Powerful people's decisions deserve to be scrutinized at a higher level than societally irrelevant people, yes.

I think the opposite, at least as far as this is concerned. To Epstein's tailor, Epstein is very replaceable, whereas to Gates, the tradeoff for ditching Epstein would be something like millions fewer people getting vaccinations

I do not buy this narrative you're selling.

Yes, of course powerful people need to be held to higher standards! This is plainly obvious to even a child.

For one, powerful people generally have advisers whose job it is to prevent people like Gates from associating with sex criminals like Epstein.

Get some sleep. This is utter nonsense.

Update for those who were curious:

Roughly one hour after I e-mailed @elithrar who kindly reached out and offered to expediate the issue, the broken DNSSEC records were partly fixed. The domain once again resolved through all major DNSes, and public access was restored. At that point dnsviz.net told me that A, MX, etc. records were "insecure", though name resolution worked fine. A few minutes ago I took another look with dnsviz and it's now telling me that all records are secure. Everything looks normal again.

Thanks a bunch for helping out, @elithrar. I really appreciate that you were proactive.

If the problem had somehow fixed itself or if the support ticket had gotten any attention or feedback at all within a day or two instead of just being "snoozed" by support staff, I wouldn't have made any noise about it. After four days of complete silence a bit of "cry-baby consumer activism" seemed like the only resort.

If CF reconnects to me with an update on why the domain dead-locked and why it took 4 days to untilt everything I'll add that info as well.

I've been OP and this has been an update about my domain woes.

That would have been very helpful. The [Enable DNSSEC] button in the control panel is very assertive and confident through its casual and innocuous appearance.

Source: me, having lost access to my domain for 4 days for reasons that are not yet fully clear to me.

Which is a bit strange. I would have guessed that the support ticket system would be prioritized by staff.