Last I read, the admin who was a day late in paying Sav for the renewal was actually able to transfer the domain to a different registrar (PorkBun) before Sav's auction of the domain was complete. This maneuver was either something that Sav's auction designers hadn't anticipated, or the auction was compromised because the main bidder (j_s_) was a hexbear user who'd found a way to make unauthenticated bids.

At any rate, I don't think they paid thousands for it.

No, you're right. It's just how it sounds with Sanders' distinct accent.

Typically, if you see that one person is being banned from a bunch of communities at the same time, it just means that they are being banned from the instance.

If an admin wants to ban one of their own users, it's a single activity that's federated out, but if they want to ban a remote user, the only way it can be done under the current system is for every community that the banned person has interacted with to ban them. It's an automatic process, triggered by the admin pressing one button once. (it's not a perfect solution, because nothing prevents the banned user interacting with other communities, at least as far as their local instance is concerned).

Well done Scotland, for drafting and actually enforcing this law.

It's no surprise that this woman, and the others pictured in the article, are all of a demographic that they're not going to have to actually make maternal healthcare decisions for themselves.

PieFed and Lemmy are different software platforms for interacting with the Fediverse (of which they are both separate parts). It's a bit like how Spotify and Tidal are both for streaming music, and you can see the same artists on both, but you can't use Spotify's app to sign in to Tidal. PieFed's API is fairly similar to Lemmy's, for the routes that it covers, but not exactly the same, so you can't use Lemmy apps with PieFed, or PieFed apps with Lemmy.

(edit, just 'cos LW is being a bit slow.)