If it takes more than 1 minute to onboard to a new service, and especially if you have to overcome any learning barrier (such as what 'instances' are and how to choose one) then the vast majority of people will immediately throw that option out and won't even consider it.
People like bluesky specifically because it gives them something almost identical to what they had before.
Exactly! What sort of logic are they even trying to apply there? Basically saying "We put a lot of time into our tech demo, and it came out better than expected, so we're going to charge for it!"
That's just crazy.
The whole principle is that the intro experience is supposed to be free. It exists to get people pumped about the cool new thing they just bought and excited to play with it.
I guess Nintendo decided that - since you already bought the console - they don't especially care if you are pumped or not. They already got your money.
Back in my days working as .NET developer on Windows 7, I came into work one morning to find a colleague fuming that his machine had died on him.
He spent the whole morning reinstalling Windows and getting his environment set back up, and then pulled the branch he was working on, happy to finally be done with setup and get back to work. Ran his test suite and bam, machine crashes!
It was only at that point the penny dropped. We took a look at his branch, and sure enough he'd accidentally written a test that, when ran, deleted his entire C: drive!
That particular lesson made me very careful when writing any code that does things with the filesystem.
As the video suggests, it's an impending problem in many places in the world, US and UK included.
And the bitter truth is that all of us could have avoided this, if not for the insatiable greed of the 1%
If the wealth earned from economic growth was spread fairly, we could all be working half the hours we do now, with all the time for socialising and family we could want.
And the real irony is that when people have more free time, they will spend their time and money on the culturally enriching things that the government is otherwise being forced to try and subsidise and give grants to keep afloat. Visit historical sites. See a play, pick up a creative hobby, eat out at independent small restaurants.
But instead we are working longer and longer hours for less, leaving us with no time for anything, and that sends all our surplus money into the exact industries that are exploiting us. 11PM depression impulse buys from online megacorps, and food delivery through gig economy apps where the delivery person gets next to nothing and the app reaps the rewards.
People are stretched to breaking point. It's inevitable that at some point, this is all going to collapse.
If they changed this in the way you describe, I wouldn't even personally consider it retcon.
To me, "retconning" is changing some point which is kinda substantiative so that it disagrees with what was presented before. "This thing we said happened? Well it didn't."
If, as you suggest, they kept the idea of making the Mojave hospitable and pleasant but changed this so it's more respectful of the existing ecosystem, then to me that's not a retcon, it's more like updating the existing concept to be better in line with the ideals of a contemporary audience. A refresh, if you will.
It would be very much in line with what the original was trying to say and mean; that humans have this power to change the environment for the better and we are using it for the good of society, it's simply that our understanding has changed in the last several decades in a way which means the visual presentation of that concept on screen needs to change.
Nintendo's site says the cartridge must always be inserted in order to play the game, and so it is the cartridge that controls the game license.
On that basis it seems likely you could sell/give the cartridge to someone else, after which they can play it and you no longer can - they'd just also have to download it first.
This is mostly the fault of what people search for.
90% of your average buyers don't go on shopping sites and search "20W USB-C PD Charger" they go on and search "Samsung S22 charger" or whatever they've got.
Sellers are incentivised to design the listings around that, or they simply won't get the clicks.
For some items like glasses it's very clear why they are pairs; if you can have a reading glass (which is an antiquated way to refer to a handheld magnifying lens, for example) then you can certainly have a pair of reading glasses because it's the two pieces of glass which are plural.
For trousers there are no certain answers, but I'd suggest it's very much with with how we conceptualise their function. For 90% of their height trousers are split and cover the legs, of which we have two, only joining right at the top.
For shirts you might think it's the same (two arms right?) but it's a completely different story because the primary function of a shirt isn't to cover the arms but to cover the torso. So it's singular. And gloves of course are distinct, so it's back to pairs.
It used to be kinda humorous in an irreverent way back in the 2000s when Google used April Fools to announce things like the Google Romance search engine, or a facility to archive all your Gmails on printed paper. It was tech making fun of itself.
But these days when the mask is fully off, and we recognise that big tech and social media has been one of the greatest problems the world has ever faced, we're not laughing any longer.
The UK is about to ban disposable vapes, but I fear it may achieve little.
What the legislation does is to define what "reusable" means, and demand that vapes must meet that.
In reality, I suspect that manufacturers will simply adjust their strategies to produce vapes that are "technically" reusable and rechargeable and meet the law in a bare-minimum way, but really are intended to be used exactly once, just like disposable ones were, and that's exactly how they will continue to be treated by consumers.
Cost will probably go up 20% to cover it, but that's all, and in the end even more material will be going in landfill.
In my opinion, what the legislation should have done is to set an absolute minimum price on the cost of a vape pen. That would be very heavy-handed, but it would actually create the strong financial motivation required to force consumers to genuinely treat the vape pen as something they will re-use.
Unlike laptops, many phones simply won't turn on without a battery connected.