How granular would the permission be? If web browsers start blocking all animation and post-load layout shifting by default, including CSS transitions and animations, this would encourage website operators to structure the page to coerce permission to animate in each document. For example, a website operator could make each page load blank other than a notice to the effect "Tap or click to view 'Title of Article' on Name of Site."

In my experience on laptops and tablets, I've found the exact opposite (eager loading) helpful in some situations with limited or no data. I would download an entire page on unmetered Wi-Fi, go offline, and read while riding as a passenger in a car or bus.

I sincerely doubt that 14,500 USD per year (full-time minimum wage) is near enough to pay for income tax, rent, food, health insurance, and a round-trip taxi ride every weekday in most of the United States. I'd be interested to read examples of budgets that you have in mind.

Recent graduates tend to be stuck with hourly food service and retail jobs. These tend to treat availability outside 9 to 5 as a condition for hiring, not to be doable from home, and not to pay enough for a taxi. Even a cyclist needs a backup during bad weather.

If someone happens not to have this privilege, then how would they go about traveling to or from work at night or on Sundays, when all the bus drivers are at home with their families? (Source: Citilink in Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA)

I imagine that most gamers are unwilling to pay for business-class service if business-class service is the only "real" service offered at their home address.

How are you going to host a game server on a home computer if you share your IPv4 address with other subscribers to the same ISP in the same neighborhood,[1] and the combined modem and router that your home ISP requires all subscribers to use lacks an option for port forwarding? Both of these are true, for example, of T-Mobile US Home Internet.

[1] Many home ISPs apply carrier-grade network address translation (CGNAT) to conserve IPv4 addresses since the worldwide exhaustion.

I expect that it'll go towards U+2E3A and U+2E3B rather than U+2013.

Who says that future generations will have electron microscopes or the ability to read QR codes. Lots of technology is lost when civilizations collapse. In the future we might not even realize that the ceramic chip contains any information.

Four of the top five and five of the top ten games on Are We Anti-Cheat Yet's list are marked "Denied", which it defines as "Games where the developers have explicitly stated that they will not enable the anti-cheat solution to work on Linux or have denied the possibility of Linux support".

What "excellent film adaptation" are you talking about? There's one old animated adaptation, and that's is. There's also a movie that bears the same title, but it's apparently a coincidence: nothing except the title and names of some of main characters matches, thus I don't see how it could be relevant to Tolkien's books.

The first thing about adapting a book is reading it at least once, and Peter Jackson skipped that step.

A proof-of-work puzzle would disadvantage phone and tablet users. One targeted specifically toward GPUs would disadvantage users of older off-lease ThinkPad laptops with an Intel IGP.

I can think of a few things leading to Voight-Kampff-style polygraph tests being phased out in this timeline

1. Several U.S. states have banned reliance on polygraph test results by employers. "Polygraph" on Wikipedia lists Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Delaware and Iowa. In addition, the federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act 1998 generally bans polygraphing by employers outside the rent-a-cop industry.
2. Autism advocacy organizations raised a stink about false positive results on autistic or otherwise neurodivergent human beings.
3. The LLM training set probably picked up answers from someone's cheat sheet, such as "The turtle was dragging its hind leg, and I was waiting for it to stop squirming so I could see if it needed to go to the vet."

That's a blockade done against human drivers, who (usually) know how to drive off the railway track, and the blockaders are only protesting rather than actively trying to murder. They stop cars from passing but don't trap them on the tracks.

What GP suggests is that by people simply standing there, the self-driving car's software will stop on the track without aggressively trying to escape.

Here in Poland we have campaign teaching people how to get out of a railway crossing if you get stuck. A bunch of differently-smart humans didn't even contemplate driving through the bar gate, and in some cases didn't even evacuate the car either. The bars are designated to break easily when forced by a car, but somehow in a stressful situation drivers regard them as sacrosanct. As Waymo cars behave that way in about every potentially dangerous situation, I'm afraid they'll do the same when on a railroad crossing as well.

If the developer has ever published the application on Google Play Store, this means the developer is verified, and the unmodified APKs still work on devices that haven't gone through this 24-hour process.