conciselyverbose

It’s really not.

In poor countries sure, but not the US or Europe. You will get sued and you will pay if you do that at any scale.

The other benefit with Costco is that they have an extremely generous return policy.

Some obvious stuff has different rules (electronics is 90 days, stuff like tires that have clear expected lifespans have their own rules), but it is extremely liberal. And my experience is that I pretty rarely have to use it, because while not everything is a premium product for a bargain price, they tend to ensure that the suppliers for products they sell have reasonable build quality and make stuff that isn’t trash designed to fail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment,_Inc._v._Connectix_Corp.

The courts aren’t. Nintendo is.

Emulation has already been litigated to hell and back. It’s very clearly legal, including relying on users pulling a blob or two from their hardware for the whole thing to function.

The problem is that “don’t let people game you” is extremely difficult.

It’s many, many orders of magnitude easier to provide a useful search of sites that tell you the truth about what they are than it is when 99% of sites lie to you.

But still declared them liable for the actions of their users.

Bad ruling, just less bad than it could be.

If I put the over/under at 10x male pirate to female, are you taking the under?

I’ve definitely noticed the results suck ass, but this is a nice breakdown.

That shouldn’t work. They should still be unconditionally liable for anything the rep said in all scenarios, with the sole exception being obvious sabotage like “we’ll give you a billion dollars to sign up” that the customer knows can’t be real.

I think what I’m eventually going to have to do is roll my own. I don’t need crazy complexity, but I do want some features nothing seems to have. I want the bulk editing that’s only on goodreads, and I really want series to be first class citizens. That means series nesting in other series and being able to have a blurb/rating for a series instead of each individual entry, mostly. I just haven’t got to it yet.

I don’t necessarily have to have the metadata all the public social network style tools use to combine everyone’s input to one book object, though I definitely understand how it’s frustrating for services to lose information when you import your lists. But organization tools are critical to me.

I had like 1200 books when I tried it, and the number missing wasn’t too bad.

But I’m not doing a list of 100 books searching one at a time. It’s bad enough to have to do big chunks to add to my reading history because I don’t keep that up. Re-doing organization without bulk editing just isn’t going to happen.

I don’t use their reviews to decide what to read, but I have checked after the fact on books I like and I think the quality of what they surface tends to be pretty bad.

A lot of mindless criticism, especially. It’s perfectly OK to be critical when a book has flaws, but so many of the top reviews were people who just weren’t the target audience criticizing it for being targeted at something different than they wanted. Whether that’s rigorous academic nonfiction with reviews complaining that it cites its sources, kid/YA books with people complaining that there isn’t enough depth, someone like Janet Evanovich or Jana Deleon writing deliberately nonsensical stuff for light humor getting complaints about not being realistic, romantic suspense getting criticism because characters are emotionally connected too fast when that’s part of what the genre is, etc.

It’s perfectly fine to be disinterested in a book because you’re not interested in that genre, but it seems like way too many of the higher visibility reviews are people who just aren’t interested in what the book is trying to do.

I have no idea.

I do know that I’m not super enthusiastic about Amazon being the one controlling my reading history, but I’ve tried migrating to several of the alternatives and it’s just too much.

Goodreads has a nice page where you can see 50 books at a time, skim down the list, and checkbox to make bulk changes. I’m willing to painstakingly reconstruct lists like that with an alternative, even though it will still be kind of a pain. But I’m not willing to manually search every title to add it to a list, or go through my reading history and need multiple clicks and backwards navigations for every book I want to add to a list, and that’s the state of anything I tried a couple months ago. Bookwyrm specifically sounds really nice, as a way to use federated tools to find people with similar interest and follow their reading and share. But the transfer is a lot.

I wish there were more cards.

I have played it a decent amount, but I probably wouldn’t still play it if it wasn’t also on my iPhone (there’s a “plus” on Apple Arcade that looks identical, too).

I like Monster Train better mechanically for the reason that it does feel like there’s a lot more variety, though I dislike how short the runs are to build a deck with. (I’d like Slay the Spire to go longer on a good run, too).

I haven’t been too far on ascensions. I don’t think they’re really more entertaining. I mostly do the daily runs because at least there’s variety there.

I thought the Hori were terrible on a bunch of levels. They felt cheap everywhere, were stupid loose on the rails, the sticks were barely better than the joycons, the buttons were worse. Free would have been overpriced.

I use and like Binbok’s bigger one that’s a similar shape though. It’s still not the quality of a PS/Xbox controller, but it’s a lot less bad than the joycon or Hori.

“AR” has always been sci-fi. The details you’re discussing have never been part of the discussion because it was fiction.

This is far more AR than any of the shitty displays that project on glasses (all of which also are distorting and changing the light from the real world) and don’t have meaningful capacity to interact with the real world inputs. Any reasonable definition of AR absolutely is including the Apple Vision. It’s the real world, in real time, with all the inputs and processing capability required to interact with it.

All your other complaints have nothing whatsoever to do with your silly definition of AR made for the sole purpose of excluding the most exciting piece of tech in the space ever. Weight and battery capacity are also completely unrelated to any possible valid definition of what AR is.

They didn’t do a clear coat like everything else ever made lol.

deleted by creator

Apple hasn’t called it AR.

But it absolutely is AR. If you can see the real world in real time, with additional information on top of it, that’s AR. Your requirement that it not be on a screen is completely arbitrary and has no basis behind it whatsoever.

For first party stuff, Nintendo launches finished games (though Sony does too).

For third party, cartridges are expensive enough that it’s not uncommon at all for companies to straight up make a bunch of content download only. A lot of “multiple game” collections only put some of the games on the cartridge (not counting the ones that tie some to keys).