1. That’s a personal preference. Many people do care about aesthetics and I don’t think invalidating their taste is fair. Hence, if you wanted to add factors accounting for that preference, you’d have to define some additional variable for it.
2. If a is a subjective measure of aesthetic value - as it must be, since taste is a subjective thing - you might as well include the factor already.
3. If a is normalised against some fixed scale, but bloat (having effectively no upper limit) is impossible to normalise, it would be more reasonable to increase f instead in order to model the fact that a larger distro may also come with more functionality.
4. You don’t need the extra parentheses around 0.5*a
5. We’re both fucking nerds and I love it

Really, the metric we should be looking at is (f+a)/b where f is some subjective weighted measure of functionality, a of aesthetic value and b describes the bloat.

An individual would risk corporate lawyers lobbing suits at them they don’t have nearly enough resources to fight. In that way, it’s much like other forms of activism: individual actions are easily singled out and retaliated against.

If a ton of people were to do so, however, they might have an impact. Either the registrar would have to take steps to limit who can submit them, which might conflict with some laws, or they’d invest a great deal of resources trying to sort out the legit ones. Trying to single out people for retaliation is hard when there’s enough of them. In this way, too, it is like other forms of activism:

There is strength in numbers. There is power in unity.

If, hypothetically, someone were to coordinate such actions in the style of a crowdsources DDoS, and they could get enough participants, they might get away with it.

Idiots participate in Bigger Idiot scheme, upset to find out they’re the Bigger Idiot.

Hard to predict.

This act broke the taboo against violence and shattered the perception of powerlessness. Turns out there is something you can do against these assholes, and it’s not as unpopular an option as you might have expected.

It may inspire imitation, emboldening other pissed victims. It may scare the other CEOs into treading more carefully. It might embolden progressive politicians to challenge the status quo, now that they see how popular that can be.

Or it might end up a big ball of hot air that doesn’t do anything. Like I said, hard to predict.

AI strong enough would be smarter than a human

General AI might be, but the type of “AI” we have right now isn’t general, isn’t smarter, it’s just a really expensive imitation engine that people keep mistaking for actual intelligence.

And the energy consumption and heat production are really not what our global situation needs right now.

Until it does, we shouldn’t exacerbate the climate and resource issues we already have by blindly buying into the hype and building more and larger corporate-scale power gluttons to produce even more heat than we’re already dealing with.

“AI” has potential, ideas like machine assistance with writing letters and improving security by augmenting human alertness are all nice. Unfortunately, it also has destructive potential for things like surveillance, even deadlier weapons or accelerating the wealth extraction of those with the capital to invest in building aforementioned power gluttons.

Additionally, it risks misuse and overreliance, which is particularly dangerous in the current stage where it can’t entirely replace humans (yet), the issues of which may not immediately become apparent until they do damage.

If and until the abilities of AI reach the point where they can compensate tech illiteracy and we no longer need to worry about the exorbitant heat production, it shouldn’t be deployed at scale at all, and even then its use needs to be scrutinised, regulated and that regulation is appropriately enforced (which basically requires significant social and political change, so good luck).

If you put things in triple backticks ```, it’s formatted as a code block

Like this

I believe you can specify a language for syntax highlighting at the start of the code block.

SELECT * 
FROM passwords
WHERE storage_method = 'plaintext' 
-- TODO rename storage method to something less obvious so the IT-Sec guys get off my case

<p class="bold">Stop storing password in plain text, dammit</div>
<!-- TODO clean up the tags so the linter stops complaining -->

if (true) this.code.makeCringe(this.reader);
else 
    { 
throw new NullPointerException("Unreachable code"); }
// Why, yes, I do love creating terrible code

I don’t know what or how it guesses the language otherwise.

if (highlighting == "Python"): 
  System.out.println("Wait, that's not a Python command");
  std::cout << "Also not Python"
  print("This one is")

CASE highlighting 
  WHEN 'SQL' THEN 'I dont know any dialect-specific ways to check which one this is'
  WHEN 'sql' THEN 'Apparently its case-sensitive' 
  ELSE 'No clue' 
END 

(concatenate 'string "I can't be arsed to try everything I know" "So this will have to do")