Yeah, code editors really missed the memo that the XDG tried sending out, that (… mostly) works so well on Desktop Linux

… which is then displayed in a longer comment…

based on text

… where have I seen that before? Genius!

Wonder why email as an identifier wasn’t sufficient…

Interesting.

Yep, that’s a fitting term. You definitely still have to rely on macOS (and keep a copy of it around, e.g. for firmware upgrades, which of course basically only come bundled with macOS versions), but other than that, you can do more or less what you want to – as long as you’re outside of it.

I quite like this idea though if I’m being honest, normie users get all the hardened security from the regular boot chain without experiencing basically any difference/downsides, while hardware enthusiasts and (Linux) tinkerers still have options open (well, options that you can get if you have a new chip on a rarer architecture with previously no third party OS).

Your understanding is incorrect, I think.

Apple specifically chose to leave it (or some part of the chain, I don’t actually know, not an expert lol) open, otherwise, a project like Asahi Linux would not have had a chance from the getgo.

I might try to read up on it when I find the time whether they still have to rely on something signed by Apple before being able to take over in the boot process.

While I agree in general, and the overall sentiment/direction here to steer towards (morally) is clear… let’s stick to facts only.

you need Apple’s blessing to boot anything on a Mac

Bootloader is unlocked and alternative OS exist. Or what else did you mean by that?