VegaKH

It was an awkward conclusion to this paragraph. When I read it, I assumed it to mean that the kick and bass may intentionally be misaligned (slightly) to make each distinct. (But I have little knowledge of music production.)

What percentage of the population is made up of the children or grandchildren of immigrants? This statistic is meaningless.

The tone of this article feels like one of gloating and rejoicing that the cocaine traffickers were not deterred. Do we really hate Pete Hegseth so much that we want to see the criminals win?

This sounds like it was written by the CCP. Chinese EVs = futuristic tech. American EVs = much shame.

"We are investigating alternative hardware..."

The way she writes like this is serious research is throwing me.

This is a long article that could be a paragraph instead and lose nothing.

I didn't realize that this wasn't posted by the dev, and that it was only meant for his normal subscribers. So my criticism is a little harsh here.

Here is my crappy, not finished game that maybe will run fine or maybe not. Could you please do some free testing for me, and optimally do a screen recording showing performance and send it to me along with your notes?

Here is the link to where you can download it, and also maybe, you know... PAY FOR IT? These broken unfinished games don't make themselves, you know.

I hated that. I didn't find it cool, just weird and distracting.

The top reasoning competitor to GPT-5 would probably be Gemini 2.5 Pro. That is the first model I would like to see it compared with.

I agree with the premise of this post, but I'd like to see it made by someone else (and not only because this is on a furry blog.)Their argument is also poorly formed and poorly written.

They start by defending their use of furry art and railing against potential backlash from HN. Then spend a lot of words talking about how Collective Shout isn't anti-LGBTQ, but could potentially become anti-LGBTQ, but even if it's not anti-LGBTQ it's bad because it's anti-abortion. None of this is actually pertinent to the argument.

Then they talk about alternatives to Visa /Mastercard, such as crypto, WERO, FedNOW, petitions, blah blah blah. Next we move on to some good-old-fashioned self promotion, talking about how they helped save some library from the evil right wing politicians.

And the article ends without even making one coherent argument, which should be this: two American companies should not be able to dictate the moral standards of censorship for the world. They have too much power and too little oversight. Let's start with that.

In the US, Visa and MasterCard are cartels of almost unlimited power. Even your bank debit card is controlled by one of those processors, so you often can't buy something with your own money unless they approve. And for some reason, they have taken it upon themselves to be the morality police.

The counterargument is that accepting payment for morally-reprehensible items might damage their brand, but I feel that this is borderline absurd. No one is going to stop using Visa because they process payments for incest games on Steam.