I’m not trying to say there’s anything wrong with showing your experience; I’m just showing mine for comparison. I do turn the front light up extra for color, but personally I think it adds a lot.
The go color 7 is also boox. Outside of setting apps to regal mode I haven’t really tuned anything. Regal seems to also help with both color and b/w contrast, but it’s persistent and doesn’t need to be changed repeatedly.
It’s a collection of games you pick from a menu. The premise is that they’re all from the same studio back then, but they’re mostly standalone.
I’ve only tried a couple so far (the first couple) and they feel pretty basic. I guess if the theory is that they’re progression in their development over time the more compelling stuff would be later? Regardless, I wasn’t expecting 50 masterpieces, and they’ve made a point of communicating that they won’t all be huge and heavily featured.
I’d definitely be interested in suggestions of ones that stand out though.
Edit: Mortol is the first one I can really see spending some time trying to master. It’s a platformer where you have finite lives and need to kill yourself one of three ways to make a path forward for the next guy. I’m going on to new ones for now, but I like it.
Most of the stuff people think are RCS aren’t though. They’re proprietary extensions to RCS that only work on Google’s text message apps, transmitted through Google’s servers, with RCS junk as fallback for other services.
It’s not actually meaningfully different than Apple doing iMessage with fallback to RCS now.
Intercommunication is still going to be bad because the standard that carriers support isn’t where all the features are.
I think his picture is probably in lower light, without turning the front light up to compensate. The color really needs light to look good, and it takes more than the black and white does. It might also be something with the color formats his example is using. I don’t think it’s differences in the screen unless his is defective, because I think his is using the same screen tech. (I’ve thought about getting the tab ultra c, but I’ll just feel like I wasted my money when they finally manage a 13"). I think the pictures are pretty representative of my experience, but it’s also possible the processing my iPhone is doing plays a role. It’s why I try to leave a little background in for comparison.
Because a crappy phone camera makes it look like the black and white isn’t great, I’ve taken pictures of that in the past too, including a close up of the text:
My go color doesn’t look like that.
You need sufficient light to get appropriate color saturation, but in daylight I think it looks pretty damn good. In darker settings you need to kick the front light up more than you would for black/white.
Photos without extremely well backed provenance are not and have not been credible evidence for a long time.
Removed by mod
You realize that your article says it’s a pipe dream right? Because even Google, pushing it, has no interest in actually supporting it in its tools, and neither does anyone else?
Advertising tracking is the primary space your privacy is invaded online. The fact that what phone you use is one of the most valuable data points they have that isn’t “you actively being signed in somewhere that shares it” is the evidence that telling people what phone you have to share a photo is a massive privacy issue. Because what phone you have is a lot of information.
What device you use is one of the biggest data points advertisers and trackers use to fingerprint you across the internet. No, “I use a Google Pixel 9” does not, by itself, de-anonymize you, but it does make a big dent when combined with other information.
You keep talking about “proving the authenticity of an image” with something that does not even move you .00000001% towards an image being legitimate. It is literally zero information about that question in every possible context. It is, eventually, if you throw out every camera on the planet and use heavy cryptography, theoretically possible to eventually, in the future, provide some evidence that some future picture came from some specific camera, but it will still not be proof that what that camera processed wasn’t manipulated.
You very clearly have no idea whatsoever what you’re talking about. This is all complete nonsense.
Anyone can write exif data to say anything they want it to. You “showing an image with earlier metadata” is completely arbitrary and doesn’t tell anyone literally anything about which one is more likely to be “real”. Again, it’s not “weak” or “bad” evidence. It is literally not capable of being evidence.
RCS still sucks. It’s a marginal improvement over MMS, and not more.
Basically all the stuff people actually care about are proprietary Google features because they had to use proprietary extensions and send everything through their own servers to make it work.
It’s really not different than iMessage. It’s no more open to any other messaging app or any other OS than iMessage is, and it isn’t really capable of being so unless the standard improves.
No, you cannot use metadata as even extremely weak evidence that an image is real. It is less than trivial to fake, and the second anyone even hints at making it a standard approach, it will be on every photo anyone uses to mislead anyone.
Most photos on the internet are camera phones, and you absolutely are not entitled to know what phone someone has. Knowing someone’s phone has infinitely more value to fingerprinting a user than including metadata could ever theoretically have to demonstrate whether a photo is legitimate or not.
Photos without a specific, on record provenance from a credible source are no longer useful for evidence of anything. You cannot go back from that.
A. It’s not even the weakest of weak evidence of whether a photo is legitimate. It tells you literally zero.
B. Even if it was concrete proof, that would still be a truly disgusting reason to think you were entitled to that information.
The device is no more anyone else’s business than anything else.
It should absolutely not be shared by default.
No, the default should be removing everything but maybe the date because of privacy implications.
I’ve finished chapter 4 of 10. I really like the art style. The top down 2D feels like 2D Zelda, the 2D platforming is a little slow but gives you the same moveset as the top down, and the 3D is basic, but really visually cool and again, same moves that all feel the same. The puzzles aren’t super complicated, but I have had to stop a second.
I wouldn’t have bought it (it’s included with the higher PS+ tier), and it seems too short with too little replayability for $30, but it’s a genuinely cool project.
I primarily use it for books, but not all fiction. Color highlighting, diagrams and graphics, and syntax highlighting of code all add a lot. Visualization of data is also enhanced a lot by color. And while I’m not a huge comic book reader, some of them look really good in nice lighting on the go color.
I think PPI is a big part of the reason there aren’t good 13" color options yet. Color is half resolution and 100 isn’t worth it.
They desperately need to do something about car software before China starts being really relevant here in EVs too.
I absolutely support massively restricting what anyone can gather, not just China, (and the same for social media/ad networks/retailers), but it’s fundamentally not the same threat as data vacuums controlled by an enemy state.
What I really miss is the browsing. There’s no similar experience to just wandering a section of a big library/bookstore and seeing what looks interesting.
I definitely prefer custom fonts and the ability to use a size that fits more than 3 paragraphs on a page though. And having whatever book I want on hand immediately.
I can’t find any list of what they actually released in 2024.
But dredge and blasphemous 2 are still pretty recent that they explicitly mention as back catalogue that make sense to be doing OK.