If you don't have your code report in at all, then you have no idea how many people are using it or what features they use the most. So when someone says "how many people use the thing? We need to prove it is useful so people will pay us to make it" then you can't answer. Or if someone says "that feature is hard to maintain, can we just ditch it?" you either have to leave it in or risk ditching a very popular feature.
Just because you had aliens last week doesn't mean that you can have Bigfoot this week. Blurry photos and poorly substantiated ravings don't become good evidence of things until you get a lot more genre savvy.
And just because the thing you have matches Bigfoot on points one, five, and six doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be like Bigfoot on points two through four. Especially if there's not a unifying theory of Bigfootness behind them and they're just a list of aforesaid poorly substantiated ravings.
which allows others to see your profile after you like them even if they don’t have a gold or silver membership,
How the hell do they expect their app to actually work at all if that isn't built in????
"Hello yes I have a dating app, it will help you find people to date. The way it works is, if you say you like someone, then they can't read about you. This will enable you to get dates with all the hottest precognitive telepaths who magically already know about you."
Unfortunately as far as I know it is pretty standard for monkeys used to test brain interfaces to eventually get infected because of it and have to be put down.
I'm not sure whether the same problems are as common in humans; humans are much less likely to e.g. yank on the implant, especially if the reason they have an implant is to work around some kind of paralysis. And humans are allowed drugs that animals are not.
Because it makes it seem like you are thinking of the people involved first and foremost as objects of biological study, and that you are the kind of person to whom that sort of thinking comes most naturally.
People will sometimes introduce themselves with pronouns, or sometimes wear little badges with them.
There are definitely people IRL who don't use the pronouns one might guess by looking at them. I haven't met many (any?) people who go by neopronouns, but they are around the Internet.
You can often just guess pronouns for people, but if you can't read the gender someone is presenting (is your new friend rocking a kilt, sports bra, and enormous beard?) it might be polite to ask, and/or to use "they" until you get the right one.
You don't have to want people to call you he/him just because you are a man. But he/him is overwhelmingly popular with men, so it's a fine choice.
If there is a field for pronouns, and you want people to know yours instead of them having to guess, you should put yours in there. The other reason to put pronouns in, even if people are likely to guess right, is to exercise the field for the people who often get guessed wrong.
I think it benefits the distro maintainers. They can vet and ship version 0.13.1 of some multi-player video game, and support that for two years without bothering to package multiple backward-incompatible releases from the game developers. People won't come demanding that they break their distro's stable version no major version upgrades rule because everyone actually playing the game can just use the snap/flatpak published by the developers.
If you don't have your code report in at all, then you have no idea how many people are using it or what features they use the most. So when someone says "how many people use the thing? We need to prove it is useful so people will pay us to make it" then you can't answer. Or if someone says "that feature is hard to maintain, can we just ditch it?" you either have to leave it in or risk ditching a very popular feature.