Hint: the investment of $11 billion refers to investment of Gates Foundation in fossil fuels.
Well, considering these exact words were used:
That foundation owns over $11 billion in investments in the fossil fuel industry, including coal-burning utility companies.
What can I say but duh. If I misunderstood anything, it was the comment I replied to, which was unclear about the "0.05% down from 6%" detail, and seemed to be associating that with the $11 billion figure by context.
But hey, nice deflection, and super cool of you to be that rude about it, too.
Does any of that matter in this situation, anyway? Exaggerating their content in exchange for money already places question on their reliability as an educational content creator.
I read it and I don't think it wasn't conflating them, I think it was just a simile. Granted, I think OP was wrong here and the simile didn't track because of it, but still, the ICE mentions could've been swapped with something entirely separate and the conversation would remain the same because it wasn't a direct comparison.
I know it can't, I had to remove it from my toolkit because it can't. It's something to do with the colorspace added in 2.10. Now, when you export an image with an alpha channel, every other piece of software sees that alpha channel with much higher contrast. There's been a bug on the tracker for years, but the devs seem split between completely not understanding the issue and claiming it's intended behavior.
I've noticed something that isn't mentioned in the issue that pretty much proves it isn't intended, however. If you export a PNG with an alpha channel, then immediately reimport it to GIMP, the alpha channel will have the correct contrast, but will be completely crunched. Lost information. No way in hell destroying the alpha channel entirely is intended.
the only thing Valve can do is censor discussions and ban people for what they are saying
Except they don't, which is the problem. Moderation of the forums is pushed off on developers, publishers and volunteers, and Valve only gets involved if they absolutely have to. It makes effective moderation of the forums dedicated to games made by small and solo devs functionally impossible, and allows for rampant abuse of the systems by publishers, such as Take Two marking negative reviews as "off-topic".
It's not, and criticizing it is fair, but... from Saudi Arabia? The Trump admin is basically modelling themselves off their shit at this point. If he really felt this way in general, he wouldn't have performed at this show in the first place. Criticizing the way free speech is handled in one country while in another country known for chopping up journalists is tone-deaf and comes off as self-serving.
An account that waited almost exactly a month to start posting money requests in random communities?
This is a classic scam, seen it a million times. Multiple accounts are made in batches and allowed to sit for a while using up the last batch.
As a leftover from Reddit, they put a minimum time on these accounts before they start automatically posting. This was done to get around automod blocks for account age.
Honestly, even if it wasn't good, I had the hope a new game could breathe enough life into the series to actually get something better later on, similar to Bombshell leading to Ion Fury.
Errors such as this have been occurring by human hands for decades, while adversarial networks and language models capable of making the same error have only been available for a few years. As such, attributing all such errors to AI is foolish, as humans have already proven capable of making the same types of mistakes.
My favorite part was a member of the SC talking about how the moderation team are the only ones who can appoint other moderators when two comments above a user was talking about being approached by a member of the SC the night before who was offering to make them a moderator.
Well, considering these exact words were used:
What can I say but duh. If I misunderstood anything, it was the comment I replied to, which was unclear about the "0.05% down from 6%" detail, and seemed to be associating that with the $11 billion figure by context.
But hey, nice deflection, and super cool of you to be that rude about it, too.