The lack of cohesion and the fact that everyone who makes camera stuff is shady as shit.

I don’t care visually, necessarily, though that sucks too.

I’m talking about the behavior. The fallen’s tools were built to play together to make encounters play one way, the hive a different way, the vex different, the cabal different. Each set was well balanced inside itself to work, but they also worked well allying with other races.

Their evolution over time has been into gimmicks and spam that don’t make encounters compelling at all.

It’s not the same thing.

It’s downgraded.

Yep, fuck all that.

Ignoring the stuff I paid for, I don’t find any of the content they replaced it with (mostly if you buy more shit) satisfying at all. The original enemies were incredibly well designed and enjoyable. The taken weren’t bad. Most of the rest very clearly didn’t have the time put into designing them. They suck, and I don’t want to play them.

They’re a mess for everyone, and there is very little correlation between reviews and actual quality. There is not statistical value to using them.

More importantly, the confidence in any prediction you make using them is damn near zero. They absolutely should not be able to fire anyone with reviews being a factor in any way.

No, there is not. A license is just a contract.

Buying a company because they have a license you want is not remotely unusual. It’s perfectly standard behavior, and the entire enterprise world would fall apart if an acquisition lost the rights to licenses the purchased business owned.

If costumer reviews/ratings were ever actually useful in any way you could make an argument for it.

But they’re a huge mess abused all over.

Apple did add RCS in one of the iOS 18 updates.

It’s just only E2EE when routed through Google.

No, it’s not the same.

Companies being acquired for their contracts is a daily occurrence.

Yeah, the terms would probably be legal, but they’d be so prohibitive that most companies wouldn’t sign them. Having to get a new license to key technology negotiated when you want to sell is a huge handicap.

Companies get acquired all the time. Losing licenses is not the norm.

Because it opens them up to obscene liability if they don’t have enforcement and age verifications well outside the range of what anyone who isn’t a massive business is capable of implementing.

Only if there’s an absolute bare minimum they’re allowed to choose of 5-10 years after the last device/software is sold.

And even then, I still think they should be required to unlock devices (and software DRM bullshit/APIs to re-implement server components) to allow people who want to maintain them themselves.

This should be a standard requirement for abandoning an internet reliant product (with all IP and internal documentation released and becoming public domain in the event of a bankruptcy, and keys handled by some consumer protection agency capable of facilitating community projects working to unlock them for owners).

But questionable value of the product aside, the fact that they’re making the effort to not be assholes and try to do what it takes to give their costumers’ products the life they can is better than most, so they deserve credit for that.

Qualcomm bought nuvia, which had a broad license to use ARM’s IP. They used said IP to make chips.

ARM claims that the change in ownership somehow invalidates the license and they were required to renegotiate new terms.

They couldn’t convince a jury because that doesn’t make sense without very specific terms explicitly detailing exactly what conditions nullify their license agreement.

Apple didn’t bother because it sucks. It’s not an actual solution (or path to one) for messaging not to be a dumpster fire.

Google “did it itself” exclusively for control. It’s exactly the same as their browser behavior.

RCS doesn’t really do a whole lot of anything. It’s a step up from SMS/MMS, but not by much.

All the features people think they mean when they’re talking about RCS are proprietary Google extensions that only work if you go through Google’s servers. They’re basically exactly the same as Apple putting iMessage on top; Apple just brags about it while Google tries to trick you into thinking incompatibility is someone else’s fault for not giving them control.

It doesn’t.

Using various AI techniques for things like pacing classes might be useful (though I’m guessing you could do just as well algorithmically). But you can’t replace human instruction in the process.

🤦‍♀️

The annoying part is that some time of self paced computerized curriculum is genuinely a good idea that I’ve been supporting for ages. But the whole premise is that this allows the teacher to spend more time in one on one instruction to get students over the hump when they have questions.

It doesn’t work as an excuse to throw out the teacher.

Seriously. I see exactly one use case, and that’s for criminals of one sort or another to mask their identity during the commission of a crime. It’s not like law abiding citizens are able to use them to protect their privacy in any way.

It’s not like digital IDs, where it’s one less thing to carry and potentially more secure. Your plate or this plate are fixed to your car the same way, both are (legally) static, and the only thing that changes is the ease of faking your plate.