communication

I actually didn't get that sense this time. Certainly the trailer left a lot to the imagination, and that's letting me imagine impossible features that weren't shown. But I thought Murray was very tame in his explanation. He didn't really promise anything beyond a giant procedural world with multiplayer, and we know they can deliver on that. Everything else might suck. I get why people are skeptical about this, but I'm feeling confident that the final product will match what was shown here.

Oh my goodness Light No Fire looks so good. I really hope they've learned the right lessons from No Man's Sky, because that trailer looked like everything I want from a game.

This is the most excited I've been about a giveaway in a while. The first game was well done and told an interesting story.

Okay, that's a fair point. They left too many blanks for the reader to fill in, and some will assume the problem is more widespread than it is.

When I put my Social Scientist hat on, I don't think the methodology was totally unreasonable or obviously malicious, so X would have to strengthen their claims to convince me to wait for court. But you're right, MM should have done better.

I agree with your point in general, but I have a hard time applying it here. Unless the lawsuit alleges that MM hacked into Twitter or doctored the screenshots, then the core claim of the MM report "Twitter served ad Y next to post Z" is not under dispute. If the claim is that refreshing a page is malicious, then I don't think we need to wait to call the lawsuit malicious.

This was what sold me on standing desks too! Taking a dance break halfway through writing a Very Professional Email almost makes it pleasant.

This is a beautiful blog post and I recommend reading it. I never used Omegle, but I now understand what we've lost.

I had exactly this problem. It's super annoying that there's no error message explaining the character limit.

Thanks a ton for this, it's really helpful! I've been conflicted because intellectually I like things like "ol" or "ul" more than "iel" for the reason you described, but I'm not strong enough in French to be a good advocate for them. "Iel" feels easiest, right now.

Would "elleux" replace all uses of third-person plural, or only those including non-binary people?

Regarding your FYI: Sorry you've dealt with that, it's so frustrating!! It's so hard to know what approach will help people understand, and I can see why a lot of people don't bother. Thanks for working to make things better :)

Thank you SO much for your answers here! And for writing that awesome Wikipedia page, which I somehow hadn't seen before. A few follow up questions, if you don't mind:

1. I found a dropdown somewhere with [iel/iel/iel]. This is a mistake, right? "Je iel connais" feels wrong. It should be something like "Je lae connais"?
2. You may have answered this already, but what's a good way to present my pronouns that says "I prefer non-binary, but I don't want to torture you so feel free to use il or elle? Something like [iel ou il, lui, le]? Useful point about accusative being unneccessary, but I'm in a situation where other people are adding it so I think I probably need to include it...

Thanks! It's really hard to get a feel for what people actually use and recognize. There are resources saying "here are 20 NB pronouns that exist", which is great, but they're not helpful to someone without a fairly sophisticated level of fluency. Perhaps [iel/ellui/lea] is an option, despite my dislike of the gender-combo construction.