> I try to bring awareness of the AI generated content so others can avoid wasting their time on it as well.

Thanks. My own AI detection skills aren't always up to par, so I appreciate people calling it out.

Can it provide vim keybindings and modes inside a textbox?

Yes! All standard input elements have vim motions support but fair warning that a lot of the standard motions aren't implemented yet.

I've run into the restrictions regarding addons.mozilla.org myself using Vimium C, but it didn't happen often enough for me to consider switching my browser over it. I think I'd rather have something that makes my entire Linux desktop environment keyboard centric at that point, like homerow seems to do for macOS.

>I like Vim

doom emacs

>share calendar/todo

There is org-caldav that you can point to an org file and it syncs with a caldav server. This way you can have two-way sync from e.g. a phone's calendar to your org file.

He is implying that he only downloads music from usenet that he purchased in some form somewhere else. Whether that is any less illegal, I don't know.

It's always crazy to see languages like C being able to beat high-level languages at some ergonomics (which is usually their #1 point of pride) just because C has bitfields and they often don't.

It can work on a vm, but for Valorant specifically it seems that detecting a vm triggers the anticheat and gets you banned. I believe this is the case for most anticheats except VAC. You can try to evade the detection, but then you just enter the same cat & mouse game as a cheater. Whether allowing/disallowing VMs actually cuts down on cheaters? I don't know.

Having followed this initiative quite extensively from the beginning, the most baffling thing has been the underwhelming support from developers themselves, both from studios and individual devs.

You would think the very idea of years of your work being rendered unplayable in an instant would be enough incentive to signal boost any effort against this industry practice.

Instead, developer discourse has revolved around just how hard it would be to do what this is petition is asking for. You are an engineer for crying out loud. If you solved a problem but a new constraint arrives in the form of a law, you figure out how to solve the problem under the new constraint. Just because something is hard, doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

It's almost like flexing your skills and signalling your elite knowledge is more important to people than simply defending what's right.

I think that most developers are just afraid to voice such anti-industry opinion. Gamedev is fairly small industry, so if you piss off wrong people, you might be left without job opportunities.

It's the publishers forcing their hand, to be fair. I don't think any developer who worked for years on a game is thrilled about it not being playable in the future.

The original petition died because Parliament dissolved. This is the new one that the UK Parliament has to consider for a debate as of right now.

If you scroll to the bottom of the petition it's already been considered, the consideration was "no".

The current state is at the top. It says "Waiting for 3 days for a debate date".