It's funny how you bash MATE for looking like it came from a time capsule but then you praise XFCE which has no modern features at all.

If you don't read what was written you may come to that conclusion. If you actually read and understood what was written you'll see the auditor laid blame at virtually every level.

Singapore. What's your point? Singapore isn't China, it's not known for cost cutting or cheap shit.

Contributing to death and proving liability are two very different things with very different legal bars. To prove liability you will need to show beyond reasonable doubt that the call going through would have lead to survival.

Typically when enshittification sets in options for new products are slim. It's one of the enablers of that strategy. Lock users in to an ecosystem before you screw them over. Be it Windows only software, or speakers which have Spotify Connect, or any other hardware for that matter.

Yes congress is supposed to set tariffs as well. The government doesn't waste money, Musk has proven that. I'm not sure what the problem is with having a school board in each state. Every state has different needs. Different levels of poverty, different availability of staff, different shootings, etc. I think you are vastly underestimating the complexity of running schools.

You're operating under the usual 100% effective fallacy. No players are not en mass building a literal robot to move the mouse. A tiny tiny tiny insignificant portion of players are building such robots and you're unlikely to ever encounter someone going to those lengths to cheat.

Anti-cheat is about preventing the common cheats, that is people doing a google search, downloading and running a program.

Except that is completely irrelevant. Most games have private modes. You can very much play with just your friends. Most games very much have that as a matchmaking option.

Your conspiracy isn't just a conspiracy it's built on a incorrect premise. Frankly I don't care what you call it. As long as it reduces cheating (which anticheat software objectively does, as evidenced by developers who were late to include it turning their online games into a stupid cheating shitshow before the introduction of anticheat) I'm all for it. Please I hope to only meet you online with a developer forces "DRM" (actually called anti-cheat) on your computer. I don't know you and don't trust you not to ruin a game for me. It turns out random strangers are pieces of shit.

Developers aren't calling for anti-cheat, it actively costs them money to implement. End users are calling it. And the "DRM" angle is especially stupid given that there's actual DRM software out there for that purpose.

Please take your conspiwacy elsewhere.

In related news:

Glock have announced that their new Glock 726-plus-AI model comes already loaded with one in the chamber and cocked with the safety off right out of the box.

Purchasers/survivors can, after purchase and unpacking, activate the safety, remove the magazine and rack the slide so as to eject the chambered round if they wish to opt-out of this fantastic new feature.

Safety first!

Actually major online competitive games work on a minimum trust model. There may not be client side computation, but there is plenty of client side trust involved in how content is displayed to be interacted with.

Virtually every such "zero trust" game has an element of wallhacking for this reason.

No they don't. Your bodily autonomy is preserved, Vanguard isn't installed in your brain. That said there are a lot of competitive sports where the actual sports equipment is in fact analysed before and after the game, and some with real time monitoring too.

People whinging that their skills are the only ones that matter and that they are upset that other people are entertained by other people's skill are the only thing that is truly stupid in this entire debate.

The ball in the article can't be used by yourself or exclusively by your friends. Some games can't be played non-competitively. Kind of like when you kick a ball around, as soon as you field an 11x11 team you are guaranteed to be outside of the scope of your friends.

The analogy holds quite well when you think about it.

So you advocate that scientific institutions ignore science that you don't like? Have you taken any steps to disprove this science?

Anyone who is willing to sacrifice any and all government services that they pay taxes for is pretty stupid. Too stupid to understand that their lives are comfortable because of the government and Trump is taking it all away. Maybe entitlement is the word. Is there a word that describes mind boggingly entitled?

Also it turns out that many diseases can be cured that way too.