Eh, anyone with their own domain can use it even without hosting anything. It just takes a DNS record. So Taylor Swift can have @taylorswift.com or w/e her official website is and that’s pretty much the exact same situation as claiming domain ownership. Someone else could likely register taylorswift.boats but I think most people would realize something is off there.
For me, there is far more content available if I want to doom scroll, especially about a particular topic.
I think you need to look more closely at the fingers in the left pic.
A.K.A. empennage.
That’s not how that works. If there isn’t a binary (because there isn’t just 2 options) then this would be a non-binary system and so everyone would be non-binary.
Was looking for this comment. Thank you.
What about the YouTube premium subscription makes it a worse experience than free?
Yeah, sorta. But this goes all the way with even more specific styling to look like Windows 7.
deleted by creator
When I ran Cinnamon Mint I definitely did this. Looked like Windows 7.
My point is that she can be @taylorswift.com not @taylorswift@taylorswift.com. Also, exaggerating the number of illiterate people in the USA doesn’t help your argument. You can already be @FaylorSwift on twitter so I’m still not seeing how this is any more secure than using her actual domain that her fans may be familiar with.