it never helps.” from Apple. In fact, as proven again and again, unless you manage to make a big enough fuss in the press there's no way to get behind their passive-aggressive wall of "fuck you"-smiles and get something from them. If you don't have enough connections and public awareness then you're just SOL.

and they've been saying that also for years. So i'd bet the answer is: "Yes, they obviously are" It's been downhill for the X-Box hardware since the 360 anyway. The few exclusives they had were pretty generic and geared towards those kind of man-childs who think of themselfes as "mature". The end was kind of written on the wall for some time now and losing the "console war" this generation to a PS5 that is not that great either was probably the last nail in the coffin.

Only that the hardware wasn't bricked, he just couldn't use it's cloud functions without setting up a new account.

Nah, it's a kids movie as the first two were, in fact it's more or less the same movie for a third time. Nothing really darker here.

Might be, but Avatar is 95% an animated movie, so I would not count it towards CGI ruining movies.

Just saw it and even the (11yo) kids thought it was a little stupid, long and repeating the story of movie 1 & 2. Cameron has probably lost the joy in it as well, at least it looked like he didn't care much any more. Like the other two it's a pretty shallow movie with cliche characters and no grey tones that still looks gorgeous after you get used to high framerates (jarring that sometimes they used 24fps and then you can see strobing in camera pans) and that videogame look. But it gets a little long in the tooth the third time around.

to fragment iOS everytime something like this happens. Pretty sad.

Function - yes, style probably not. But there's a significant price-difference between "style" and "so obscenely expensive that you should be put unter guardianship"

It's legal here in Europe - although the Subway usually is not a "public place" but has it's own house rules. But obviously you are not allowed to publish imagery of someone who can be identified in it (and is not an official or "public persona"), without their consent. That would violate the human right to one's own image.

In Abu Dhabi, of all places, where thy need mire energy to cool? Sure, they got plenty of oil and when that's gone, plenty of sun - but this is still stupid just for the sake of it.

Same if you ask it about the next full moon - or really anything temporal subject about the present or future where there's a lot of training data from the past - as is to be expected.

I think the biggest flaw was using the term "artificial intelligence". Sure, it's not wrong per se, like artificial leather is not leather, but clueless people get caught up on the "intelligence" part.

Posting that here seems like preaching to the choir

which came out in 2009, IIRC, is still the gold standard for Apple's OS-Updates.

It's the same with some people seeing similarities in people where you don't see any - and vice versa. Everybody seems to construct his image of a face from different details.