Grangle1

Pretty much how Bluesky took off at all. It's just the polarization of the platform style reflecting the polarization of society: Twitter/X went right-wing so the (center-)left made their own platform. It's the same thing the right did when Twitter was politically censoring right-wing content before Musk bought it and Trump made Truth Social, the only difference being that Bluesky got the Big Tech and mainstream media blessing. Musk said he would stop that sort of censorship but just reversed it to censor left-wing content. Nobody actually wants a truly free platform, they just want their echo chamber.

It's how the anti-fingerprint features in browsers like LibreWolf and Mullvad are supposed to work: make all copies of the browser appear the same, which means forcing some options in the browser settings, so that nobody sticks out. Brave chooses to do so by randomizing some of your browser fingerprint data, which really doesn't prevent you from standing out, it just means that your fingerprint info the trackers collect isn't going to be accurate.

'Yum' could work too.

Be careful with the Tor features, they allow you to open some onion sites but don't supply the extra anonymity/security of the actual Tor browser.

So the first two seem to deal with throwing a capture item at a creature (wild pokemon) and/or releasing a character's own creature to fight it (essentially first seen in Legends Arceus, tossing a ball at a pokemon to aggro it and then fighting it with your pokemon). The third one is, as others have said, Mount transitions (at least in pokemon, also first seen in Legends Arceus if you only count ride pokemon; if vehicles are included I believe the first would be Sword/Shield). Though if vehicles are included Nintendo would have a hard time fighting that one. Vehicle transformation, especially in racing games, has been around forever.

The posted text could be translation. Kinda reads like it.

Good luck arguing it here. I wonder how many here are 16 or younger, or close enough to that age where they grew up with the technology constantly in their face and couldn't POSSIBLY imagine having lived without it.

I know a lot of people here are/will be mad at Musk simply for personal political disagreement, but even just putting that aside, I've never liked the idea of self-driving cars. There's just too much that can go wrong too easily, and in a 1-ton piece of metal and glass moving at speeds up to near 100 mph, you need to be able to have the control enough to respond within a few seconds if the unexpected happens, like a deer jumping in the middle of the road. Computers don't, and may never, have the benefit of contextual awareness to make the right decision as often as a human would in those situations. I'm not going to cheer for the downfall of Musk or Tesla as a whole, but they do severely need to reconsider this idea or else there will be a lot of people hurt and/or killed and a lot of liability on them when it happens. That's a lot of risk to take on for a smaller auto maker like them, just thinking in business terms.

Well, no shit, that's what the rule is SUPPOSED to do! No more impossible-to-cancel subscriptions, please.

Anti-Semitism is indeed a problem, but given the situation it should be 100% allowed to criticise Israel's conduct in its handling of the war. The modern state of Israel =/= the Jewish religion. Many on both sides of the argument forget that.

I'm sure we remember not too long ago when rather than go with what the sponsors, advertisers, etc wanted and rein that shit in, they loosened the rules and Twitch essentially became a straight up porn site for two days. And it was already bad before then. It's probably only the plausible deniability preventing them from going back to loosening the rules and raking in the camgirl money. Disappointing but absolutely not surprising that Twitch would probably make more money from that than from the ads, sponsorships and so on they get now.

IIRC Mozilla doubled down on their v2 support when Chrome announced the shift to v3. But then the Chrome monopoly judgment came down and with it a lot of speculation on Google dropping their funding of Mozilla, so maybe Mozilla could be changing its tune to either protect or find a replacement for that funding? Nothing of substance is happening yet, it's still all speculation, but I do hope nothing like that does happen.