The simple reason is that most people here already use Firefox, but not most people here are already vegan.

Except if it’s minified for production.

What’s bad about IPv6?

The fact that this is the top comment sends a funny message about the Lemmy community as a whole.

Federated?

You’re just throwing together FOSS buzzwords at this point.

☝️ This user has never donated to libre software.

Cue the Lemmy users confidently suggesting you just convince your workplace to migrate to Linux.

How do you know the features are making the browser slower?

How are you quantifying the increase in weight?

How are they being forced upon you?

Order of operations is too ambiguous, needs more parentheses

My GOG and Bandcamp libraries.

Ok. How do I get my friend group to use Revolt?

Then tell them what your pronouns are? I don’t get the issue here.

After switching to Kagi, I see no reason to return to an ad-supported search engine.

I’m currently at work, so disclaimer: the following is an AI-generated summary.

• The UK government has responded to the petition to stop game publishers from destroying players’ access to purchased games, but the response is complex and not entirely straightforward.
• The government’s response suggests there may be some legal avenues to pursue, particularly around the requirement for clear information to be provided to consumers about the longevity of online games.
• The key issue seems to be that most online games do not clearly disclose when their service will be shut down, depriving consumers of information needed to make an informed purchase decision.
• Pursuing this angle through consumer protection regulations like the CPRs may be more promising than directly trying to prevent game shutdowns, which the government response suggests is not clearly prohibited.
• However, there are many open questions about the specifics of how to report and pursue potential violations, including around time limits, penalties, and differences between UK and Scottish law.
• The creator of the video acknowledges this is a complex legal maze, but believes there is potential to do “a lot of damage” to the industry if the right approach can be identified.
• Gathering more signatures on the UK petition may help, but the creator is skeptical this alone will lead to legislative change.
• Overall, the response provides some promising leads, but significant work is still needed to determine the best path forward and how to effectively leverage the apparent legal violations.
• The creator expresses frustration at having to essentially act as “self-checkout law enforcement” to get the government to enforce existing consumer protection laws.
• Despite the challenges, the creator remains determined to find a way to hold game publishers accountable and prevent the destruction of purchased games.

virtually no exposure at all

That is not correct: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40011314

You’re linking to a halfhearted attempt at an exposé written by someone who acts unreasonable towards any attempts at clarification.

I can understand the decision somewhat.

Putting “The Lord of the Rings” first in the title would imply that this furthers the main canon, when it’s actually only set in its universe.

They could have indeed chosen a better subtitle though, like “from The Lord of the Rings”.

I’ve seen hearsay that there have been Yuzu patches specifically to aid compatibility with TOTK before it was officially out, which would have greatly supported the “mainly/primarily used for piracy” argument in court.

With GOG, you can at least have full confidence that the game will continue to work without any outside connections.