elliotwu

Enshittification is a natural process, like aging and corrosion.

I adopt a 3-2-1 backup strategy for my Bitwarden password-protected exports, which can be decrypted without needing Bitwarden. In addition, I use a separate non-Bitwarden solution for my MFA secrets. This minimizes damage and facilitates migration in the event Bitwarden degrades, or becomes outright malicious like Raivo. The same would apply to the password manager I'd switch to after Bitwarden in the near future, and any other password manager thereafter.

Problem with Authy is you can't export your seeds externally, which sets you up for failure if Authy decides to turn into the next Raivo.

There is an unofficial method by using devtools on the desktop app, but it's been EOL for months and it may soon stop working completely.

Elegant-cli's author's mistake was not including a full-text copy of your MIT license (which has your name) in the repository (his own MIT license does not count as a "proxy"). That is precisely what the MIT license requires, and hence a direct non-compliance by Elegant-cli.

However, the MIT license does not dictate how Outstatic should be mentioned in Elegant-cli's marketing materials (like their website or README file).

Though poor etiquette, it is permissible for Elegant-cli to not mention you or Outstatic anywhere else, so long as full-text license copy with your name is included in the repository.

If you needed that kind of attribution, you should have picked something like the BSD-4-Clause (https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-4-Clause) or MIT-advertising (https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT-advertising.html) licenses, instead of the MIT license.

On one hand I have a 4GB sandisk cruzer drive for sneakernet transfers still working well since 2008. On the other, 3 of my sandisk extreme ssds died this year. Luckily I had mirrored backups elsewhere.