And despite not naming the US and Israel (because diplomatic statements are weird), it does include a explicit call for "all sides" to respect international law and a moratorium on striking energy and civilian infrastructure, which encompasses their actions, too.
Not that the wording isn't explicitly created to be served to Trump as appeasement, but it's also absolutely not what the headline or the article says it is.
I can't.
But I can call it out before it evolves for being used incorrectly in a confusing manner. Particularly when used in a conversation regarding technical guidelines for age certification, or when calling for outright banning specific creative products out of concern for their impact on children, both of which seem to be very serious things that at the very least benefit from some precision about what exactly we're talking about.
No it hasn't. Some site not knowing their dark patterns from their anti-features (or deliberately mushing them both together for marketing purposes) doesn't mean it's not a misnomer.
I mean, I'm open to it becoming the new standard at some point. There is no coming back from the incorrect meaning of "metagame", or at least of "meta", so it's no longer a misnomer.
But this? Nah, it's gonna take a minute, if it ever happens. "Anti-feature" has become a buzzword in midcore techie spaces itself, so I don't know that extending "dark pattern" to (incorrectly) include every undesirable feature will ever take. Plus, what would you call actual dark patterns at that point?
Every time I accidentally pay attention to US politics in any way I end up with a headache, but...
Addressing the issue of the strait, Hegseth disparaged reporting that the US had not been prepared for Iran’s effective closure of shipping route. “The only thing prohibiting transit in [Hormuz] right now is Iran shooting at shipping,” Hegseth said. “It is open for transit should Iran not do that.”
...what?
Yeah, that number went up pretty fast during the 2010s and 20s. Honestly, I think at this point it's a cost/manufacturing reliability thing. There aren't that many panel manufacturers, and these days a 65 inch OLED can be found for like a grand and a LED one for half of that. That's sort of been "what a TV costs" for most of this century, so cheaper panels at scale in that price range probably means people go for the bigger one they can get in that price range unless they have some hard space limitations.
Yes.
I mean, for one thing, that's a misrepresentation. You don't need a behavioral scientist to figure out that "come back tomorrow for another reward" is a good engagement tool. For another, it's a misnomer, because that's not a dark pattern, it's a deliberate, out-in-the-open design that is transparent about how it works.
But do I think that people freaking out about engagement tools they don't like while giving functionally similar ones they do like a pass is a moral panic?
100%, absolutely yes.
There's a reason why the PEGI rep talking to Eurogamer clarifies that this specific wording would absolutely have unintended consequences and they're limiting the age ratings impact and leaning on content descriptors instead:
"There was some discussion here," he added. "Some people pointed out that these are features that make the game engaging and fun - this is enriching the game experience similar to a cliffhanger in a Netflix series. So we mostly want to inform parents about this, because there's no reason why we should give Animal Crossing a very high rating. So this is going to stick to a PEGI 7 but it will have a descriptor that explains this. The exact language of the descriptors still needs to be figured out."
So yes. Slippery slope, moral panic, will somebody think of the children stuff.
Hah. You do you. I get how it'd be obnoxious to be called out, but man, it's not my fault that you chose the worst possible example for this. Like, literally the worst iteration of Windows for the specific metric you called out, in a clearly demonstrable way that a ton of people measured because it was such a meme.
You can block me, but "they are what they are" indeed.
Incidentally, this is a classic opportunity to remind people that blocking on AP applications sucks ass and the only effect it has is for the blocker to stop being able to see what the blockee is saying about them while everybody else still gets access to both. Speaking of software degradation, somebody should look into that.
Myyyyyeeeeh. A lightweight distro or a conemporaneous distro sure.
If I'm running GPU accelerated Steam, tons of tabs on Firefox and the same highly customized KDE desktop full of translucent components and extra animations I am willing to bet they'd both chug.
Which is what the conversation is about: new software doesn't suck, it's doing more stuff.
For sure, all things being equal Linux does run ligher on RAM and VRAM, so if you're using something that is speficially memory-limited so Windows and Linux fall on opposite sides of overflowing the available memory you'll definitely see better performance on Linux, but that's not an inherent issue with poorly made software having a huge performance overhead.
EVER is a long time.
The current implementation? Not unless they stoip training along the same lines they currently are. I think there's some value, and you can access it pretty easily with the open source freely available models that are out there and some semi-decent hardware, but hundreds of billions to trillions in revenue for multiple corporations? Nah.
They'll maaaaybe mitigate it by shifting people away from home computing and into connected systems, but I suspect the moment the bubble pops or hardware production levels off with their current demand people will end up realizing they can run 90% of what's being offered in a gaming laptop from 2020.
Myeh. I think they mostly do fine, but they're certainly not perfect. These are reasonable, but some of the stuff they're saying about it is factually incorrect, too (like I said, there ARE age-based commerce lockouts in games already despite their statements).
All they need to do to be functional is have a modicum of consistency and at least be reactive to feedback. The Balatro thing sucked, but they did correct it. Some of these changes seem to be specifically a reaction to the Balatro thing, in fact.
See, I have a real issue with the "12 year olds (or anyone, really)" bit there in juxtaposition to all the pushback on OS age verification.
The gaming community has spent the past decade and change doing the exact same moral panic routine that anti-game violence crusaders did in the 90s and are in the process of finding out why it's a bad idea.
Age ratings and content warnings? Awesome. Gating content and design concepts on moral grounds? Not that.
It doesn't need to be too specific, in that PEGI actually reviews the products it rates. You get to send them a preview and then talk to them about the rating.
I also think some of the stuff Eurogamer is reporting is weird, or maybe PEGI is just not aware of some tools? For instance,
A game will be able to reduce this PEGI rating to 7 if it contains in-game controls that allow you to turn spending off by default. As Bosmans noted, these systems don't really exist yet, but the hope is this change will incentivise them to be developed.
Is not actually true. Many games do include turning spending off based on the user's reported age or whether they're on a child account (Nintendo and Sony both support this as a feature, I believe).
So there is some confusing stuff going on here, but it all seems mostly reasonable to me.