I know enough, little one. Maybe you do.
You're insufferable. Surprised you still ain't on reddit. That's where the corporate bootlickers are. I guess Lemmy.world is the next best place.
No. It's when bugs and crashes happen, and trying to identify how. Such as stack traces for example, or memory usage when an app keels over.
I'm not here to market FF, I'm here trying to counter balance the Firefox haters that spend so much hate to trash the only real legitimate chance we have of Google not dictating web standards. I don't know why so many people shill for billion dollar companies. Do they love Google that much, or are they simply useful idiots?
It's open source. You're assuming this is telemetry without having an idea. Could be diagnostics, could be pocket, could be sync check.
Without evidence, sounds like a load of FUD.
It's ironic you call me dense.
Of course not. It's an internet browser. What point are you trying to make?
I'm not American. I don't know much about the history of the body, who runs it or whether leadership changes under different administrations. I also do not know the scientists and whether they are completely state funded or there is industry funding anywhere (on this, or on previous or future research papers). I'm asking questions. I looked at the paper and usually it has a section on conflicts of interest, even to state that none exist. I couldn't see that section on this paper.
So first cutting airline emissions increases global warming and now cutting ship emissions does it?
It's like someone is trying to get a message out that cutting emissions is bad for the planet. Are we being gaslighted? Is this industry FUD?
What are you stating cannot be turned off?
This sounds baseless without any evidence.
And it can be turned off.
This is the bargaining stage of the five stages of grief.
Maybe it's Stockholm Syndrome.
In agile development. You do a little, release. Otherwise it is too big and may never be done. The fact they committed resources to improve this is a positive. The hope is they build on it and add more options.
However, if they get trashed for trying, they and many other companies may not try. Why spend money to get a bad reputation when the spending nothing creates less I'll will to the company. That is ultimately the decision Product Owners and Designers will weigh up.
I think for progress, the best approach is maybe "positive first step but more options are needed for non-bonary for this to really make players feel comfortable".
From a technical perspective, separating pronoun hard coding from the models gives more scope to give more options in the future, however, as someone mentioned, there is a lot of art work needed on assets and animations so the new shapes function the same in all cases.