Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.

You do not like them, so you say.
Try them! Try them! And you may,
Try them and you may, I say.
- Some hunter in California, apparently

Actually 4-year-olds call them "baddies" now, so "bad guys" is a step up.

If you look at their YouTube channel, lots: https://www.youtube.com/@Digit...

They mostly do game reviews and industry news in addition to reviewing individual consoles. Also, given that modern consoles are constantly being updated, it's a rich source of content.

Nice to see an independent voice re-emerge. I bet the value of IGN has dropped quite a bit now that most views are driven primarily by the algorithm.

What is the purpose of "Deep Science Ventures"? They appear to be a marketing company specializing in greenwashing.

This kind of "research" is great at spreading vague worry and disrupting their target markets. Chemicals are bad, mmkay? They have no real evidence, just the naturalistic fallacy in disguise. But is the solution to force-feed every "novel entity" to rats to see if they get sick, even if you just use it to wipe the floor? Of course not. It's to buy the natural products of the "high-quality, de-risked companies" they incubated.

Read between the lines here. This is part of a long-term marketing campaign, not anything credible.

It's a mystery to me too. I don't understand why people play sports games in general. Is it about basking in the reflected glory of a simulated team? Or is the gameplay actually fun on its own?

I really enjoyed Dragon Age back in 2009, but every single iteration thereafter has been a disappointment. Seems like any success to come out of EA is entirely by accident.

They released a Dragon Age game last year?

Wonder why it flopped...

Your PC is not longer yours. Since Windows 11 requiring TPM 2.0, this was the obvious direction... and they are finally able to start rolling out software that explicitly requires it. Of course this has been true for a long time with rootkits and other anti-cheating software, but now it can be cryptographically enforced. Eventually this will extend to Internet access in general with every request tracked back to a personally issued token. What a brave new world for surveillance!

By god I hope we're not still using QWERTY in 2265...

Well I guess someone finally got around to watching Star Trek IV.

It always amazed me that Scotty even knew what a keyboard was, let alone how to touch-type proficiently.

Those for customers who paid for a high-availability SLA, to Google would be liable in the event of outage.

This is really saying nothing here. Instead of crashing the grid and disrupting their whole service, they'll reduce power usage by stopping "free" and low-tier customer workloads in order to prioritize their paying customers. It's a no-brainer.

Obviously none of it is "essential," but in this context they mean "essential to Google making money."

Sure, there are lots of settings you can tinker with. It's a bit of security theater. It will gladly block lazily-coded bots with a useragent of Java-http-client/17.0.10, but from the other side, even if you have a known AWS IP address, some very basic steps will let you through. Just change your useragent to Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 11.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.6998.166 Safari/537.36 and if you go low and slow, you'll get through. Of course you can ratchet up the pain on your end-users by adding Turnstile or something.

That's correct, you should have no personality, no preferences, and never complain. The ideal employee.

It is dangerous to ask it something too specific. It will gladly fabricate a plausible response. For example, don't ask it about what episode of The Simpsons something happened in; it will often just make something up and cite a specific episode, but when you go watch that episode, it's completely wrong. It desperately wants to give you an answer to a question and will generate lie after lie in an attempt to make you happy.

Of course, I'm anthropomorphizing a soulless algorithm here. It's remarkably good at generating plausible answers, and it just happens that most of the time those plausible answers are mostly correct as long as you don't look too close. It can be a useful tool if you know its limits.