I turned off categories the moment they appeared, so this has not been an issue for me. Everything plops into one inbox, and I sort/delete from there, as I always have.

I've been using Gmail since 2004, and cannot remember a single time an email has been "randomly lost". Occasionally there's a spam false positive, but that's about it.

I almost included that very point, but decided it was best to not go on and on by trying to cover all scenarios.

My only personal experience is with Ring, and it's just a single "security screw" (that's fancy Amazon spelling for torx) between someone and the reset button. A few more screws to get it off the wall. If anyone were to do anything, it would be stealing it. But it's not like I wouldn't notice. I'd get motion notification and a video of the person as they loosen the screw, unless they show up with a wifi jammer, at which point I think we've moved beyond doorbell stealing.

I mean, sure, it's really poor design to have the factory reset button be the actual ring button, instead of a separate switch that you need to go through some effort to get to. But I'd be hard pressed to categorize it as a security flaw. It's a factory reset, that pretty much any connected device has a reset button to facilitate. The owner is notified and the "hijacker" does not get access to anything on the owner's account, they just get to connect the camera to their own account instead and have access to it from that point (provided they have some way of providing it with wifi) and until the owner has looked up how to reset it again.

Of a much more serious nature, is how they apparently don't encrypt any of the network traffic. That really should have been the headline.

Given the amount of people out there not treating people like people, perhaps it evens the scales a bit.

I don't think we're really disagreeing all that much. Games companies are obviously not drug dealers, but many are pretty much gambling establishments at this point, and their focus is more on those mechanisms than on gaming. Talking about "addictive gameplay" back in the NES or C64 days, was talking about something very different to today's addictive gameplay, and the companies are intentionally preying on susceptible brains.

The end result is that gameplay is kind of irrelevant, it's just a vehicle to deliver the first dopamine hit and rope in a new "customer". And it shows. The last time I can remember a game from Ubisoft that seemed to come from a place of "hey, wouldn't this make for a fun game?" was Grow Home back in.. checks Wikipedia.. 2015. Anytime I hear hype for something from Ubi/ActiBlizzard, I just move on. I know what that game will be focusing on, and it won't be innovative gameplay. It will be about carefully measured dopamine bursts and fomo to keep people playing and paying long after they stopped having fun.

Which is why it's so good that we now have ready access to games made by gamers, because they wanted to make good games. Obviously they'd like to be paid for their work, but there's a big difference between "I'd like enough money to live comfortably," and "we need ALL of the money and will happily have kids steal their parents' credit cards to give it to us!"

My point wasn't that there's something wrong with doing things for money, it's that there is something wrong with doing things with no consideration for anything other than money. "...for no other reason than to maximize income," to quote myself.

I disagree with the premise that making a profit necessarily indicates they're doing something right. E.g. them making a profit is not convincing evidence that drug dealers do something right (I'm not saying none of them do, but you'd need something other than them making a profit to show that). Not coincidentally, appealing to addictive personalities to get money is pretty popular among game publishers these days.

I'd heard nothing about this game until seemingly every streamer on the planet got sponsored by them. It took me about thirty seconds to notice it was from Ubisoft, and lose any interest. Ubisoft does not make games because anyone there wants to make games (that's obviously an exaggeration, someone there genuinely wants to make games because they love games, but none of those people get to make significant decisions), they make games for no other reason than to maximize income. This does not make for good games.

I feel quite grateful we now live in an online age where shelf space is no longer the gatekeeper of games. Coincidentally, I'm sure, that did conveniently somewhat coincide with the rise of "money is all that matters" games mega corporations.

I'm holding on to my current car until it rusts to pieces, probably. One reason being these new features. Not that I mind that they're there, but I strongly dislike not being able to have my settings persist. Another reason is that I'm really happy with it and it's not getting a lot of distance put on it, so why would I spend a ton of money on a new one. It seems somewhat unavoidable that my next car will be electric, but that's also a case of "the longer I wait the better", as there are still gaps in model ranges.

I'm happy to hear you can even turn it off while moving, to be honest. I figured it would be a "must be in park and push these seven buttons for ten seconds" kind of jumping through hoops.

My car only has the speed limit graphic changing color (well, it can also beep but I turned that off before I even put the car in drive for the first time). I know it has an adjustable margin, but if I remember right it only has two settings and neither are high enough to compensate for the inaccuracy in the speedometer at highway speeds. Not to mention that I actually want to speed a bit under a lot of circumstances, so ideally I'd want it to have separate offsets for each speed limit.

Annoyingly, the car actually knows the exact speed even though the speedometer always shows higher than real speed. If I zero out the average speed measurement and maintain an exact speed, that will show the correct speed. But, for some reason they've decided the speedometer should show a few percent more than actual speed, giving a higher inaccuracy the faster you drive.

As for the system causing more risk than it solves, what matters is how it pans out on average. The statistics over the next few years should show whether it has any measurable effect whatsoever. My hunch for the speed thing is, not really. I don't get the impression that people unintentionally speeding is a cause of many accidents. I somehow doubt the people who prefer to turn it off will start running people over while doing so either.

That's not how it works, based on what I've read. If your foot is glued to the floor, the car will just go. It will only limit you in the sense that it requires a bit of an extra input to breach the speed limit. I imagine it behaves a bit like how some hybrids respond a bit slower to respond to accelerator input when it's right on the border of needing to start the engine, preventing you from going off battery power unless you really mean to.

Considering there hasn't been a huge increase in fatalities after the introduction of things like adaptive cruise control and steering assist, the indication seems to be that more people are helped by these systems than become idiots who believe any new system equals autonomous driving, and then have those systems fail on them with tragic outcome. I mean, we've had people going to the back of campers to fetch a drink before steering assist was even a thing. That level of stupid will find a way to cause accidents regardless.

Based on everything I've ever read about these systems (as they are implemented in the EU), the decision is yours. You can turn it off when you start the car, as I already mentioned. If the system is enabled and you want to go faster than what it thinks the speed limit is, you just have to apply a bit more force than usual to the gas pedal.

Yes, it can, and does. What's your point? That because sign recognition isn't infallible we should use GPS and map data instead?

As I said, ultimately it's always the driver's responsibility. At least in the EU, it's considered a driver aid not a magical "no one will ever speed again" device. Last I heard you can turn it off any time you start your car, if you so choose.

Are you sure it uses map data in California? I'm pretty sure the primary method in Europe is by traffic sign recognition. Otherwise it wouldn't catch temporary speed limits or be of any use in tunnels (of which we have a _lot_ in places).

And, the driver is always ultimately responsible, so if the car gets it wrong you'll still get a ticket, no worries.

There are web pages that do this. I haven't used one in a while, but from what I remember the last one I used even included regional limitations per platform the title was available on.

I use Plex as a media center, and it has a "watch from these locations" section and includes the ability for me to define which services I actually subscribe to. It has been accurate the few times I've tested it.

I reached a point a long time ago when I just gave up. Not only is content now spread across so many services, but some of their apps are so bad it can even be difficult to locate content you know is there. The user experience from piracy is so much better once all the automation is up and running. I now treat these services a bit like content creators that have Patreon accounts. I pick a few to support, and that's it. The others get money from the people who choose to support different creators than I do. The difference, obviously, being that not supporting someone on Patreon does not infringe on their copyright when I watch their video on YouTube.