Right now - easy, with the difficulty going up over time as the main Chromium codebase continues to change (and especially as it gets security updates). I think I’ve read that some variants (Brave?) have committed to supporting ManifestV2 for as long as possible, for instance with their own fork.
All that yes. The Wooting One (original that uses IR light) let you use buttons to simulate controller axes, change how hard you need to press to activate, and add second functions to keys. It was an interesting idea but I found the gaming part the original keyboard to be only usable in a limited set of games as it’s not as sensitive as a controller stick, and as a keyboard it wasn’t great either. Hopefully V1 problems, I know they had through another version of the IR keyboard, and then came out with the Hall effect keyboard. I like the idea but never could get used to it, and when the spacebar was loose I retired it after fixing it.
Yes, the packet passes through routers at each stage and they direct the packet to the ‘closest’ path based on its destination, until the final router has the destination on its network. This can happen a few times (for something in your ISP network), or 10-30+ times for something further away.
I’m not sure how consistent it is but the static binaries I have for btrfs-progs are about 2x larger than their dynamic counterparts. If you statically compile it only the functions actually used are included in the binary, so it really depends on how much of the library is used.
I’d have to check my iptables syntax again but I’m not sure you want the FORWARD between the networks unless C has a manual route to get traffic for the 192.168.15.0/24 network back via B. You just want to NAT A behind B’s IP on 192.168.38.0/24. I think the forwards are sending the traffic without doing NAT on A.