Yes, sadly, they do not cure mental illness.

Same.

I'm almost hopeful that in a few years, Starlink Mobile will be the push I need to change. I'm waiting until then, or it gets even worse with T-Maybe

There's a difference:
- In the case of a remote test, those who fail are not out the cost of travel and accommodation.
- In the case of an in-person test, those who fail are out the cost of travel and accommodation.

Not even denied for inability to afford last-minute travel to a city where the exam is held?

Truth Social I'm sure. As hard as it is to believe, there are still people who think Trump is a genius, and still want to "own the Libs".

How much of that is related to GOG's reputation for being selective about what games and genres they accept? I get the impression that GOG is a bit more "curated" than some other PC game stores. The curators don't really want visual novels (a style of menu-driven adventure game). And apart from new releases by CD Projekt (which owned GOG before the end of 2025), I suspect that GOG seeks to poach "catalog" games that have already been successful on the competing store Steam as opposed to having a game at day one.

Sources include GOG forums (thread; thread)

The used-game market isn't nearly as important to new gamers as it is to older gamers. They're used to change, and for the majority of ALL gamers, it's not a big deal.

This decision was almost certainly backed by market studies and accounting projections. They realize there will be "resistance", but like the Borg, resistance is futile. There won't be enough of it to get anywhere NEAR break-even with the revenue increase this move is going to create.

In the end, it's all about the Benjamines. They're confident that when the dust settles, it's going to be a net-positive for their stock price. And at the end of the day, that's all that matters to them.

We need some new laws on the books though, enshrining strong consumer protection for digital assets.

Use of "digital" meaning purchasing a download appears to have originated in "digital phonorecord delivery", a term of art in a United States copyright law.

oh no! AI is coming for my click-bait articles!

It's just another pebble on the "AI is good" side of the scale if you ask me.

Wikipedia has some great examples of what happens when someone that's been promised "points" (a share of the net profit) on a movie has enough money to sue the studios that try to rip them off.

They scurry under the fridge like cockroaches and settle for big amounts to avoid having their accounting practices further scrutinized. I don't see why they're so afraid of it, everyone knows they do it.

My expectation is that the mechanism that puts an end to it will be the IRS or similar. Like Al Capone learned, the government lets powerful people steal from the powerless, but it doesn't tolerate it when you steal from the tax man.

Sounds similar to the practice of "hazing" new pledges at college fraternities. Too many times the frat organizations kept saying "it's not our fault, we didn't know, they were acting independently!". Finally campuses basically said the buck stops with the org, it's such a common problem you can't turn a blind eye and say you didn't know it was going on. It's your responsibility to be actively LOOKING for it and making sure it doesn't happen. And if it still happens, you'll be held partly responsible.

Funny how the (severe/dangerous) hazing suddenly stopped after that. Hold the managers responsible for what goes on during their watch and suddenly they start doing their jobs.

What the hell is that? Is that a salesman in PC-speak?

The responses it provides are "the right responses, most of the time", so it comes with the same risks.

Like when you're working in the kitchen and swing your elbow and bump the handle of a knife and it flips off the counter and starts to fall. And you "instinctively" reach out to grab it, only just stopping yourself in time to avoid cutting your hand.

Your cerebellum said "I got this!", and it took your brain a split second longer to "countermand" the order to grab the knife. It took a little longer to process all the context of the situation, so it wasn't just looking at the "catch falling thing before it hits the floor". Your brain realized that on this specific occasion (when the falling item has been identified as a knife, and previously learned knowledge says it's dangerous to carelessly grab it) that was not a good idea. The cerebellum lacks the "memory" of the cerebral cortex, or the "processing power" to identify the falling object, so it's doing the best it can with the information it's got. In MOST cases it's a good response, so the CT provides a fast, strong response to reach out and grab it.

Computers that try shortcuts run into essentially the same problem. As a rule, computers are good at coming up with quick solutions to either very general OR very specific problems. They struggle in the middle-ground where analysis of context and history can change the desired response.

iirc that's entirely the job of the Cerebellum. It monitors stimulus on the way in and responses on the way out, and when it's seen it enough it creates "shortcuts" that allow for both faster and more automatic responses.

Indeed, the first one we learn is walking. (balance without a cerebellum is very hard) There's a rare defect where the cerebellum fails to form / fully form, and those people have a really hard time living all their lives on "manual mode".

Riding a bicycle is a good extension from walking, your cerebellum gets to go back into intense learning mode all over again.

I really don't see why any of this is "news", we've known about the concept for centuries, and the mechanisms behind it for decades.

How are these people not in prison?