I wonder what the reaction will be from the companies hiring Google’s advertising services. On the one hand, Google is clearly ensuring that they get as much money out of the deal as possible, but it also must lead to more people seeing the advertised brand, likely even encouraging it’s sales. The author suggests that this is a bad deal for companies working with Google, as well as Google’s users, but I can’t help but think that the companies purchasing ads from Google are coming out ahead on this one.

What’s interesting to me is how differently C# scored vs Java.

Holy shit Yatzee is still at it? Good for him.

But to know for sure we’d need statistics which we don’t have.

Precisely my point.

It’s basically just a really elaborate angry comment on a SanDisk SSD. Sucks that you lots your data, but it’s a single failure that could happen to basically any drive. Back up what you care about. Absolute waste of time ‘article.’

Only appreciating the big flashy outcomes of science is exactly how you end up with no science funding. Iterating and improving something is important work that should be applauded.

How certain could we be of where these clouds would fall once they were created?

No, I’ve never heard of it. Thanks for the suggestion!

Honest to god doublethink right here.

Party-based RPGs like Baldur’s Gate or Pillars of Eternity. I absolutely love this style of game, but it feels like there are precious few titles to choose from. Anyone know of any hidden gems?

I contend that there are more games out there now that are made for the sake of making them than ever before. It’s just that fewer and fewer of these games are AAA titles. The indy scene is really what are making these games nowadays.

There are certainly many games that shouldn’t have limited inventories that have them, but I also think there are many games for which a limited inventory enhance the game. I do enjoy games that make me make decisions about what I want to take with me and budget my inventory space when it makes sense.

The early God of War games were so unbelievably brutal for these. On harder difficulties, I would often master a boss only to have to retry it again a few more times because the quick time events to actually finish them off would be kicking my ass.

Pretty much any mechanic that just takes away control from the player is a bad one. It’s much better when the player can affect a negative event in some way in order to lessen the event, or just bring it to an end. I bet a fear mechanic that at least allowed you to steer your panicking character would make it a lot more palatable.

There’s a massive difference between one’s intentions and the consequences of one’s actions. They are only talking about their intentions, while the rest of the community is bringing up the inevitable consequences.

When we all started using Chrome to get away from Microsoft’s web stewardship that arose from everyone using IE.

it’s basically the server that decides if it trusts the judgment of the client or not. Can’t wait to see that cat-and-mouse game going on

This is partially correct. The server will check that you have a valid token issued by a trusted third party, who will almost certainly be Google, Microsoft, or Apple. When you connect to the web page, your browser will give this token to the server and say “hey look I’m legit.” The token will have enough information on it to identify that it is relevant (being provided by a client that matches the hardware it is meant to verify) as well as a cryptographic signature that verifies it is in fact from the trusted third party. So it’s less the server trusting the judgement of the client than it is the server trusting the judgement of whatever third party is attesting to your system.

$65CAD for 300Mbit fiber. Just clocked it with a speed test at 350/480, which is weird. I don’t really trust any speed tests though. Worst part is that we reliably lose connection every time it rains heavily. Brought it up with the ISP and they have just blown me off so far.

I feel this. Gaming for me is about getting better at the game, and playing with it’s systems. I think it’s why I typically gravitate towards competitive games over story ones. But having the time to master competitive games is proving more and more difficult as time goes on.

The problem is that Microsoft is in a position to push Teams in an unfair way. They bundle it with other software that their clients will already be using, thus making it the most convenient choice. Convenience is a huge deciding factor in what an organization adopts, since supporting a single software bundle can be much easier than many disparate ones. Leveraging your existing market share in an unrelated domain to edge out competitors in another is exactly why antitrust legislation exists.

Totally proper use of the law.