use TLS enabled dictionary service. if there is none, you dont want this feature. at all. make sure they click through something or explicitly enable is even hard as you cannot assume a user understands the impact. they might not understand what it means to send their data over plaintext, or what someone can do with it.
Will the existence or lack thereof excuse the absolute lack of security and privacy this package exhibits? And the lack of interest from the developer?
Sure. We've had dictionary software for decades.
This whole trend of adding a service to stuff that doesn't need a service is very annoying.
In that language…
Since it has been shown to be possible in other languages, why wouldn't it be?
Absolutely. In my understanding and approach, it would need two smaller modifications:
1. making "scanning" (the clipboard capturing feature opt-in, with a huge notification for the implications
2. disabling the English-Chinese online translation plugin by default
use TLS enabled dictionary service. if there is none, you dont want this feature. at all. make sure they click through something or explicitly enable is even hard as you cannot assume a user understands the impact. they might not understand what it means to send their data over plaintext, or what someone can do with it.
Does this service exist?
Does it matter?
Will the existence or lack thereof excuse the absolute lack of security and privacy this package exhibits? And the lack of interest from the developer?