communication

I actually didn't get that sense this time. Certainly the trailer left a lot to the imagination, and that's letting me imagine impossible features that weren't shown. But I thought Murray was very tame in his explanation. He didn't really promise anything beyond a giant procedural world with multiplayer, and we know they can deliver on that. Everything else might suck. I get why people are skeptical about this, but I'm feeling confident that the final product will match what was shown here.

Oh my goodness Light No Fire looks so good. I really hope they've learned the right lessons from No Man's Sky, because that trailer looked like everything I want from a game.

Some libraries have headsets you can loan, which can be a great option.

Like another commenter said, VR arcades are pretty widespread and affordable. In my area, though, most of them use HTC Vive or Valve Index. I don't think I've ever seen Meta headsets anywhere.

This is the most excited I've been about a giveaway in a while. The first game was well done and told an interesting story.

Okay, that's a fair point. They left too many blanks for the reader to fill in, and some will assume the problem is more widespread than it is.

When I put my Social Scientist hat on, I don't think the methodology was totally unreasonable or obviously malicious, so X would have to strengthen their claims to convince me to wait for court. But you're right, MM should have done better.

I agree with your point in general, but I have a hard time applying it here. Unless the lawsuit alleges that MM hacked into Twitter or doctored the screenshots, then the core claim of the MM report "Twitter served ad Y next to post Z" is not under dispute. If the claim is that refreshing a page is malicious, then I don't think we need to wait to call the lawsuit malicious.

This was what sold me on standing desks too! Taking a dance break halfway through writing a Very Professional Email almost makes it pleasant.

This is a beautiful blog post and I recommend reading it. I never used Omegle, but I now understand what we've lost.

Didn't realize this hack was so simple! Somehow I previously got the impression that the hardware mod was complicated.

I think this may be different than the Jeopardy situation. I know there's a general sentiment that Burton was the best option - and I felt the same way at the start of the process - but I've read a lot of behind-the-scenes accounts that suggest Burton simply wasn't good at the job. They had to spend hours refilming segments in ways that weren't necessary for other hosts, and the finished product wasn't as good as most of us were imagining.

Obviously the Mike Richards situation was ridiculous, and maybe there was sabotage we don't know about. My own sense is that the hive mind was wrong about Burton for that specific role - and that's not a knock on Burton! - and things concluded well for everyone.

I don't think you're arguing in bad faith, but I'm not going to engage with that because I don't want to get lost in a semantic argument.

Have you ever been bullied before? When you were young, did kids ever call you names? It sucked, right? Even in kindergarten you were smart enough to be hurt by it.

Now, imagine the teacher started calling you mean names as well.

And your parents.

And everyone you love.

And now imagine that you tried to carve out a small part of your life where you weren't being called something horrible.

Wouldn't you have deserved that? Weren't you smart enough to know you didn't deserve to be called names?