Ephera

My brain would also like to propose a new spelling+pronunciation for "remember": rember

Yeah, people would understand it, but would look at you funny.
Partially, because they're just not used to it. "Hochseil" and "seiltanzen" are composite words, but are also just used commonly, so they have made it into the dictionary as separate entries. Meanwhile, "hochseiltanzen" is merely a neologism at this point.
But it does also just sound like you're really shoehorning in that you're specifically walking on a high wire. Like you're just bragging about it.

What's also kind of funny, is that we have nominalization in German as well, so where a verb (or other word) is used as a noun, and using "das Hochseiltanzen" as a noun does not sound out of place to me. In fact, when I throw "hochseiltanzen" into a search engine, I get four results, all of which use it as a noun and like it's a completely normal word that does not need explaining.

Fun fact: "Krebs" is German for "crab".

It's a logo commonly used for political movements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raised_fist

It certainly isn't just nouns, you do have classics like "zusammensetzen" (put together) and "verschlimmbessern" (to make something worse, despite attempting to improve it).

But yeah, I'm having a hard time coming up with a particularly long composite verb that still makes sense.
Usually, it's one word + a normal verb to kind of change the meaning of the verb, like "tanzen" means "to dance", and "seiltanzen" means "to walk on a tightrope" (literally: "to rope-dance").

And while you could theoretically extend it, e.g. as "hochseiltanzen" ("Hochseil" is a tightrope that's high above the ground; literally "high-rope"), we just say "auf dem Hochseil tanzen" instead ("to dance on the high-rope").
Or I guess, you'd specify that it's a Hochseil once and then say "seiltanzen" in the following sentences.

I happen to be a software developer, so I hope you're in for an info dump:

Webpages are generally designed as documents. You type a URL into your browser, it downloads a webpage document and displays it. This simple concept also allows for hyperlinks and browsing history, which just put another URL into your browser, so that it downloads and displays a different document.

But it does not work for everything. For example, this meme was brought to you by the web version of Microsoft Teams™, where if you were to switch between pages by downloading entirely separate documents, then you'd get kicked out of calls every time you do so.

This is why the entirety of MS Teams is using a singular document. It's a so-called Single-Page Application, SPA (*insert scary music here*).
When you click on a navigation element, it doesn't put a new URL into your browser for it to download. Instead, some JavaScript monstrosity starts churning, downloads whatever information it needs and then modifies the displayed document, so that it looks as if you had navigated away.

To make it extra confusing, it also does typically change the displayed URL, it just doesn't instruct the browser to download+display the respective document. It does this, because it tries to emulate a normal, document-based webpage, with browser history and where you can link to subpages.

Well, and this is then why opening in a new tab is often broken. Because there is no link there. It has to emulate the behaviour of a link via JavaScript just as well. If the developers do a bad job at that and never try out shortcuts like middle-click or Ctrl+click, then they may never get implemented.

Having said all that, there's also a chance that the devs decided to intentionally hinder opening in a new tab.
Because MS Teams and other SPAs are JavaScript monstrosities, downloading+displaying the document anew like when opening in a new tab takes an obscene amount of time.
And having two tabs of it open means that you get two notification sounds for each notification, and users might accidentally join multiple calls.

But yeah, that I can't have a call in fullscreen on one monitor and respond to chat messages on another monitor, without jumping through hoops like in the post, that's just bad either way.

Well, in this case I'm merely talking about the webpage not giving access to the right-click menu, as well as to shortcuts like middle-mouse-click and Ctrl+click, which would normally allow you to open parts of it in a new tab.

If a webpage were to actually check for cookies, to try to detect whether you've got two tabs of it open, then yeah, Container Tabs would be a solution for that, since it isolates the cookies.

Here they started doing such phishing tests a while ago and our IT department had significantly worse stats than other departments, in terms of how often we would click on the link in the phishing mail.

And yeah, the conclusion was that we were just being asshats that decided to poke around in the obvious phishing mails for the fun of it. Rather than getting extra security training, management told us to just stop dicking around, so that our stats look better.

There's cardboard envelopes which often don't fit into mailboxes, but might not be completely obvious under the doormat?

I know it's a joke, but I did not find it worth worrying about lactose. I mainly had problems with it when eating cereal or drinking chocolate milk. And for both of those, oat milk is absolutely fine, since you probably have oats in your cereal anyways and some of the premixed chocolate oat milks you can find in stores are IMHO nicer than the cow milk ones.

And even with yoghurts, I can get a decent selection of vegan ones that taste virtually indistinguishable.

So, I guess, I tolerate lactose so long as I do not have to talk to it. 🙃

I find that if your command is complex enough that editing it on the terminal becomes annoying, then there's a very high chance you want it in a file anyways, just to document what you did and to allow easily re-running it.

Having said that, you can also have your shell open the command in your editor of choice: https://www.stefanjudis.com/today-i-learned/edit-long-shell-commands-in-your-usdeditor/