I don’t know if it works for windows but on other operating systems if you hold shift while pasting it strips the special formatting. I don’t have a windows machine readily available but I hope even if it doesn’t work there this will be useful to other people reading the comment. I agree though. Basically the only format I ever want to keep is _sometimes_ the link with text. And even then usually not the exact coloring/indicators.
Tell your friend to look up the Western Reaches style of play. One of the core ideas is that you begin and end each session in a safe zone so that you can have a rotating pool of adventurers. You can tuck in some rules for having mercenaries for when you have fewer than the encounters are balanced for and you’re off to the races.
It does reduce the possibility of highly on rails campaigns and instead requires more of a sandbox plan with one page dungeons and stuff. Even so, it seems made to solve this exact problem.
> Tell your friend to look up the Western Reaches style of play.
The playstyle is called West Marches.
IMHO, the important bit of this style isn't so much the player pool flexibility (tho it does help that case), but the inversion of who's driving the story. The DM prepares the world, but it's up to the players to organize their excursions outside of the safe zone, for their own reasons. This forces more involvement of the players in the story, instead of the more passive campaign on rails you mentioned.
So in the GP's case of flaky low-effort players, West Marches style may not help because it puts more burden on the players in addition to just showing up and having everything presented to them.
That said, if the group can manage to do it, player engagement should be higher, and the DM suffers less disappointment because they're only prepping a session of content based on the players' plans for that session, not a long storyline that requires more alignment and adherence.
West Marches doesn't have to be totally on the fly for the DM. The players organize and define their agenda prior to the play session, so the DM should have a little time to prepare. The excursion is planned to visit a specific area of the map, so the DM only needs flesh out a bit of the world at a time.
D&D has too many rules. I invented a really light weight set of rules so that we can engage in more "role play" as opposed to RTS. It's more fun for the casual game and you don't waste so much time between turns.
Try anything that's described as "Powered by the Apocalypse". It's an excellent foundation for rules-light role-playing games.
Urban Shadows was my intro into this style of play. Monster of the Week is also very good. But there a huge number of great games out there that are not D&D (which is really a bit clunky and overly complex, IMO).
You just have to make up your own - unless you want to!
I didn’t see it mentioned in the comments so I guess I get to be the person to post the quote!
> “We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be”
Excerpt From
Mother Night
Kurt Vonnegut
This is often quoted from Mother Night but it’s actually in the preface so I don’t know how many people actually see it within the work. Anyways, rather than self aggrandizing in the way the linked article is, the story in the book is a cautionary take. The book is about a Nazi propagandist that is secretly an American agent feeding broadcast lines to the Allied forces in subtleties in communicating his propaganda like pauses in between words and other tics.
The idea in the book is what does it matter to be a good person in private but a driver of evil in public? How much bad does it take to outweigh good and if you do bad things to effect something positive, are you absolved of those bad things anyways?
No, I think not. If you do ill to achieve good you are accountable to both. It is easy, sometimes, to imagine that some thing you’ve done has overridden and eliminated some other thing you’ve done but it isn’t really true. You’ve done both. I recognize I’m speaking in circles a little but I think it’s important to confront the idea that the things you’ve done are not undone by other things you’ve done just because you feel the ends have justified the means.
Remember that who you think you are is a private fantasy. Who you actually are is how you are experienced.
I keep circling this with AI and I'm not really sure what to do with it. They mention that the AI is meant to be used as reference only in the linked article but what does that actually mean? Who is checking who? Is the AI filling out the data from what it sees in the PDF and the user is expected to check it or is the user filling out the data and the AI is expected to check it?
Is the cost of AI useful if all you're doing is something like 'linting' the extraction? How do you guarantee that people really, truly, are doing the same work as before and not just blindly clicking 'looks good'. What is the value of the AI telling you something when you cannot tell if it is lying?
Yeah, I've seen this "for reference only" wording in many places, often used as a sort of disclaimer on stuff that could be wrong, but I have absolutely no idea what it means in that context. To me "reference" implies comprehensive, high quality information that I can refer to when I need to know some obscure detail of something.
Is there some legal context in which this phrase has a specific meaning, perhaps?
If you don't feel like you need the extra bells and whistles don't worry about it. The great thing about org-mode is it _is_ just plain text and all the magic is in the interpretation of the plain text. If you have yourself a table and one day ya want to do some spreadsheet magic on it or pipe it into a script easily, you can just check the manual for how to do it and KO it right there in the same place the data lives. Remembering how to do it afterwards is optional.
Personally, I use lazyvim in neovim and doom emacs in emacs and just kinda switch between the two based on what I feel like in a given day. NeoVim tends to have better treesitter/LSP stuff as well as marginally better performance, doom emacs has way better test running and org-mode and it is only a little behind neovim in that other stuff.
All the above is to suggest I think the question is flawed. BUT! To answer the question literally, my favorite thing in org mode that I've never seen anywhere else is the ability to dump babel blocks in my notes with code samples that are actually runnable and the output is able to be piped somewhere else.
Seems to be a problem with the gem website, consistently getting a 403 from some kind of GraphQL API.
ETA: I wonder perhaps if the job posting is in some kind of pre-published state? Or maybe something in our resumes is catching on some kind of spam filter. I sure hope not for the latter
I think GraphQL works its best magic when you are building your own unified data access layer for a backend. Your individual services can be backed by Postgres or Mongo or an in memory database, whatever, doesn’t matter. And from there a backend queries that, translates the data into a RESTful one, and passes it along to a front end Backends-for-Frontend style.
In this way services get freedom to define their stack while still neatly fitting into the suite of services, products get a tidy interface from which to query everything, and because the GraphQL consumer is more akin to a regular database consumer, the database muscle memory kicks back in.
I’ve also grown to prefer bespoke backends for each client over a super backend that tries to anticipate all of the needs of all the clients. It just opens too many holes and what it buys in versatility for the client author it also gives to the exploit author.
I used it full time with Doom in a mix of typescript, JavaScript, ruby, and golang for a while. I got frustrated with a few minor things like heredocs not highlighting the inner syntax (which isn’t a standard thing, but a nice to have) and with phoenix live components not having syntax highlighting if they are defined in an elixir file. I messed about with getting the tree sitters for that to work the way I wanted them to but ultimately I’m mostly back on neovim.
I still keep eMacs open every single day though and use org mode religiously and I am not opposed to digging through a project with eMacs because the code navigation is ever so slightly preferable. I think if it was just _slightly_ more popular and there were a few more hands on the doom eMacs project it would be no contest.
This minimizes things a bit. The definitive editions got torn apart for being ugly and poorly developed. It was a better experience to use the originals and mod them in many cases. This original version is still not available and people are still upset about it. Looks like the DE version of GTAIII currently has a 6 out of 10 on steam so it probably hasn’t been improved since release.
I have played the DE version of GTA 3 (in fact I just finished) and it wasn't nearly as bad as they make it out to be. In fact I would say it's a better experience than the originals for those who haven't played them. Of all the bugs I've experienced, almost all of them were in the original release, which I played extensively.
It's best to ignore youtubers and generally disagreeable nerds from reddit and all those places. They feed on hate.
> I have played the DE version of GTA 3 (in fact I just finished) and it wasn't nearly as bad as they make it out to be. In fact I would say it's a better experience than the originals for those who haven't played them. Of all the bugs I've experienced, almost all of them were in the original release, which I played extensively. It's best to ignore youtubers and generally disagreeable nerds from reddit and all those places. They feed on hate.
While I don't disagree with your experience at all of it being better than the originals, that is unfortunately just part of the issue here. The background is that Take Two has been very litigious, and a number of high-quality mods are no longer relevant due to their actions.
I may be misremembering the details but iirc there was a very high quality GTA4 graphics mod that essentially gave the game "modern" graphics that too was forced to stop due to legal issues(to say nothing of the GTA3/VC etc mods). GTA 5 loading times were very high until a single guy fixed their shitty code with a mod.
Take Two isn't just poorly managed or have poor code quality (which they do), they are also hostile to users wanting to modify their game. A good bit of the criticism here isn't specific to the game itself (which for eg may be fine once it loads) but rather their behaviour.
considering all of the moral hand-wringing over the content of the GTA games there's some sort of deep irony over the fact that the developer is apparently not super ethical.
or maybe it's not irony, but the opposite of irony. maybe it's totally predictable and shouldn't take anyone by surprise at all.
reply