I get if it's hard to figure out who's a scammer, but can't they at least figure out who is calling? And if the other end can't prove that it owns that number, they don't get to call me.
Also, getting SMS from email addresses. Nobody asked for that feature, please nuke it.
Many scammers use internet telephony to call someone and some even spoof the caller id. In India, the mobile companies request subscribers to report any international call which shows local spoofed caller ids to them, so they can investigate it. So I am guessing it is trickier than we believe to track them ...
Unfortunately it's paywalled, but... International in which way? The actual connection from the voip system to the POTS must be inside the country I thought. And if it's not, there has to be some telco-operated gateway to whichever country it's in. Sure the end person using it is in another country connecting via internet, but there must be some local entity to go after.
Ime those people don't want to see the content at all; xcancel is used mainly by people annoyed by login walls (I even have an account! It's just annoying.).
(By 'those people' I mean those who tie their app experience to its CEO's politics or whatever. I'm no supporter, nor in the US so don't feel particularly affected anyway, but mainly I just don't care about the CEO one way or another when I use a website.)
I wonder if these as well as "there is so much Elon hate" template comments are just his cronies projecting. Musk seem to have some irrational one-sided grudges on just about everything in the world.
Irrationally? The man fired tens of thousands of American citizens from their jobs on a whim, disproportionately veterans. Failed at his ultimate goal after firing everyone, and then just left.
Seems very rational to hate someone who messes with your livelihood to stroke his ego
Is also partially responsible and yet for the death of hundred of thousands of people around the world, if not more via the gleeful "deletion" of USAID. Musk is an evil narcissistic stain on humanity.
No guy, this is the one, this is the coding agent that everyone is going to use now, instead of the one that is in the editor or part of their existing ai providers offering.
They lose money on every dollar they invest overall in xbox as a business. They pretty publicly documented this (which is unusual for Microsoft).
Overall gaming is a dying business. Everyone has a pretty powerful smartphone in their pockets, and there are so many platform vying for attention. AAA gaming is becoming a smaller fraction of the overall gaming pie, so I would expect prices to go up. Mobile gaming usage is up from 42% -> 55% from 2017. Even based on analysis from Steam's data, Indie games are 48% of sales, vs 24% in 2018.
Good. AAA should die, and the earth where it had grown should be salted.
Gaming is fine. Remove AAA from the equation, and current gaming is perfectly fine. Indies are plentiful and offer a great experience. Even lower-budget games from larger companies are fine without being plagued with every horrible practice (e.g.: microtransactions).
Also, the past 4 decades of games are still available. Hell, I would probably need two lifetimes to play all games in my queue list.
It may not be the infinitely profitable industry that attracts the likes of Microsoft, and that is a good thing. In fact, I view Microsoft failing in gaming as a hopeful sign for the health of videogames.
What? Both PC and mobile markets are growing by any reasonable metric, and consoles are propelled by stellar Switch 2 sales.
The gaming market is ripe with money, it is total failure on Microsoft side that they failed to capture any of that. Xbox is on life support, and Windows platform tax is captured by Steam, where Valve funnels it into Linux to make its own platform.
Sounds like an opportunity then for you to create a competing company that functions the way you feel it should function. If that's what people value, you'll take all the business since you're the only one offering it.
> Sounds like an opportunity then for you to create a competing company that functions the way you feel it should function
Sure, if one has millions and millions in capital. Because why would an investor put a money in my company that works the way it “should” according to me if it produces lower profits as compared to my competitors?
Because buyers choose to spend less money, so if a business comes around that can offer the same product/service at a lower price, the investor will want to own a piece of that business rather than the one that is about to lose buyers.
Right, because we never see investors making decisions that are suboptimal in the long term because they're too focused on short-term gains. Everyone is perfectly rational, and high initial costs have never discouraged anyone from trying to displace an established dominant player; it's purely because the dominant players are perfectly efficient and don't ever try to rent-seek.
I did not claim any of that, so not sure if your reply is misplaced.
It’s an easily observable fact that throughout the previous decades, investors have invested in businesses that reduce profit margins. Amazon being one of the most famous with the slogan “your margin is my opportunity”, but also Walmart, Costco, and other businesses that end up winning because they delivered acceptable products or services at lower prices.
No, my reply was not replaced. You were replaying to a thread where someone was told that they should start a competing business to Microsoft to displace the Xbox, and when the obvious response of how much money was needed to start such a business, you replied with a hand-waved explanation of how investors would be interested if it would eventually lead to a return on investment. You said something that was not technically incorrect in a vacuum but completely ignored the context behind what the person was actually asking, so I was pointing out why your response wasn't particularly relevant or helpful.
I understand that you weren't the one who initially claimed they should start a business, but if you're going to jump into a thread where someone is told something nonsensical and defend the nonsense by ignoring the context, it's reasonable for others to also jump in and call that out.
Didn't Nex Playground pretty much just do that? I saw them on display last time I went to Costco, and they apparently outsold Xbox during last year's Black Friday sales.
That's a great comparison, human vs ai on a wall of text.
The problem is that it doesn't fit the sales pitch of LLMs and agents - humanlike or better, repeatably, 24/7, for a fraction of the price, you just need to make sure that you give it all the rules.
Unfortunately we can't really have a meaningful conversation until the money vampires have left so we will need to reschedule this until after the bubble.
And why not fire that exec who doubtlessly costs the company far more money while adding substantially less value than any of these employees?
If a company is genuinely losing money and needs to boost it's profitability surely the easiest place to cut costs is the top where the lowest ROI positions are.
Always goes back to that story from Nintendo when the Wii U went pear-shaped on release, Satoru Iwata and many other executives all took substantial pay cuts to keep the company healthy without demolishing their own ranks. Be nice to see an American company do that just one time, as a treat.
"Coverage is denied for the cost of your visit to the doctor and prescribed treatment because you didn't go through our triage concierge chat bot first."
reply