But you can, in fact, be too careful. Availability is one arm of the security triad.
If whatever complex configuration you have set up to avoid exposing something to the Internet is incompatible with something and what you wanted to do can't be done, or if you look and see that setting all that up would be too hard and don't bother to expose the service at all, then your security posture is incorrect because your service is just as unavailable as if someone else broke it.
That certainly sounds like a thing you would want, nay need, to fix.
It could probably change the language selector.
If I'm an elite hacker spy who works for the hacker spy division of the Chinese army, am I going to change the system language of the thing I am hacking to Chinese and forget to change it back?
Mostly so they could say they did.
You don't do the development on the board.
I think it has something to do with your brain playing both sides of the dream. You are coming up with how to react, but you are also at the same time coming up with what happens next. So if you dream a lion and you are like "uhoh, what if the lion tried to chase me, that would be a problem, I'd have to run away," then you're now dreaming about a lion that is chasing you and how you are running away.
Or plants. Or whether you should shout at people. Or sort of the concept of women.
Nah, that's an NPU.
The graphics stack is better, but the security isolation is IMHO solving a problem no one really had, at the cost of breaking a bunch of integration mechanisms people actually used.
You want UI security isolation for something like Android, where most software being run is fundamentally opposed to the interests of the user and wants to steal anything not nailed down, and you also contain things at the file system level. If Facebook could screenshot every other app all the time it absolutely would, and people would download it anyway. To some extent the enforceable promise that it can't do that is why people are still willing to download it anyway and let it do all the other things it does to compromise a system.
In a distro shipping legitimate software, isolation at the desktop UI level is nice for defense in depth, but not really drawing a real security boundary around any program to the point where a user can trust a machine with malicious software running. It doesn't matter if I can't steal Firefox's pixels if I can echo "export PATH=$HOME/.evil-firefox/bin:$PATH" >>~/.bashrc.
"We suspended this developer for violating our policies. Our usage policies prohibit any use of our services to exploit, endanger, or sexualize anyone under 18 years old."
New moderation strat just dropped: don't have any and then suspend anyone who notices.
I don't think ActivityPub is set up for one server storing and forwarding a whole feed of everything, like Usenet. Right?