Quoting: Romlok

Quoting: BloomberyWhat is "unknown", Linux?

Given that a large jump in "unknown"s apparently happened at the same time as a large dip in "Windows" (April), my guess is that Microsoft changed something privacy-wise in Edge which made Statcounter not be able to identify them as Windows.

Then, that the subsequent drop in "unknown"s in June resulted in a fairly proportional increase in all the platforms, suggests to me that Statcounter (likely driven by the increase in "unknown"s in their data) found a way to identify (or guess/assume) a browser's platform in spite of some common cross-platform privacy feature.

Edit: This effect seems especially stark in India! https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/india [External Link]
(also, 13.8% Desktop Linux in India!)

wow linux marketshare in india is impressive! at the same time it make me depressing to think that a few other countries must have an minuscule marketshare to compensate (after all the average world wide is 3%, if one countrie its much higher than 3 other might be lower)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapulwhat is next, rockstar will make an patch so you cant kill any one anymore in GTA? and you will say that is not censorship?

yes that would not be censorship. You playing a video game is not you expressing your right to free speech. Rockstar changing their game so that you can't kill any one any more is actually Rockstar expressing their right to free speech.

Now Rockstar being forced to do this by a 3d party like the Government, now that would have been censorship by that 3d party. But this rarely if ever happens in our western democracies, yes the alt-right is crying loud about companies doing this do appease to "a different audience" but that is just them crying about it, as normal zero points of evidence is ever presented (which they see as proof that it is a conspiracy). Nor would it follow any forms of logic since this "other audience" is a very small group of people that would never buy the game anyway (which the companies knows full well) so that is not why they are doing changes like this (and there is also not a lot of cases of companies doing this either, I mean Skull Girls is not an example of a company even doing this and yet it will still be an a list somehwere of a situation where it happened).

you are defining the artist as an company not the individuals who work at it.
sure i dont expect nintendo to allow an creator to kill mario or anything like that, but i dont expect then to launch an game and change it for different regions, or change it after launch.
they gave their artists some creative constraints, the artists wrote, draw etc in that limitations their design goals and philosopy might be completely different if they had other constraints.

for example, if you know you cant kill an character you might try to find other ways to create an emotional impact on your art, if you writing thinking you can do that, then someone else remove that from the story, then your story might end up without any scenes of emotional impact as an result of that change.
if an company hired me to write an story and i didnt agree with the creative freedoms they gave me i could simply not help then with their project, they would be able to relase it anyway, but not slap my name in the credits with something like "from creator of X,Y,Z book/movie/game" (assuming i was famous), that is completely different from they leting me write what i want, then changing a lot of things without informing me and keeping my name in the credits.
hell the gaming industry was infamous for ghost writing in the past anyway.

and speaking on censorhsip vs freedom of expression:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWqvaMEFIdI [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MetallinatusWe are running in circles with this discussion.

that is stupid, of course translations arent changing, and while dubing change how the anime "feel" it still wouldnt count as censorship, we cant have an 1:1 experience, if the new audience have to read subtitles then they will have a different experience and that is specially bad for kids who are learning how to read (or dont know) if it remain unstranslated it still an different experience because you have no idea what they are saying, if its dubbed then the different voices, voice acting and sound of sylabes is different.

yet, i dont count any of those as "censoring" and i dont think anyone would.
the best experience for people is the original, followed by subs if they can read and then dubs, but even then im not saying im against the pratice of dubing and some people prefer the dubbed version.

the issue is when they completely change what the character said, i dont pay cable for that.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

what company is that? they make gpus for companies or something like that?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MetallinatusReplacing something with something else ≠ censorship.

And even if they kept the lyrics the exact same, the singer would still be different, because it's not a matter of lyrics, but a matter of having a song in the country's language.

again, im not against translation.
but changing the musis as well?

as for "not censorship" back in the days many businessmen didnt believed that japanese shows could make an sucess in the US without changing a lot of things, that is why they made power rangers for example, instead of showing the original shows as they were.
if you cant broadcast your show as is without any modification that dont count as censorship?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Metallinatus

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: Metallinatus

Quoting: elmapulnowadays companies are mora acountable when they censor stuff because we have internet and can get informed about it, but still, most people dont know about censorship that happened in the past, for example i went to one of the biggest anime conventions from Brasil called "Anime Friends" , there was going to happen an show from the artist "Rica Matusmoto" who many openings, endings from pokemon and other animes, and dub the main character satoshi (ash), there were people there cosplaying pokemon characters... you probably would guess that those people who went to the event knew her right? or knew about the censorship that hapened in this anime, the soundtrack replacement etc right? nope, most didnt, to this day.

*Sigh* it had to be a Brazilian...

A few season 1 episodes got censored here, and that is a popular bit of anime/Pokémon trivia on the internet, so it's silly to think that your average young anime fan doesn't know about it. But you think they don't know about it just because they don't know about the singer of endings that only aired in Japan? Dude.

And to make it worse you are comparing that to censorship? You really need to pick up a dictionary, dude. The Pokémon that aired here is (or was? I don't watch it anymore) the 4Kids version. They censored a bunch of crap in every anime you could imagine, everybody knows that, but replacing the Japanese themes with localized ones is definitely not censorship.

i count as censorship, they didnt believed the original songs would make an success and didnt give it a chance to show its potential.
but regardless, that was not the only change they made.
for example, in they cut "violence" when kasumi (mist) slaps the main character, among other things, replaced all the dialouges from the first movie and many dialougues in other episodes, censored an pen because it was an real product among other things.
i wont list all the changes, there is the webpage dogasu for that, take a look at the kangaskhan episode for example.

what is censorship in your opinion? censoring political opinion?

Everything else you mentioned can be censorship, 4Kids was trigger happy on censorship, everyone knows it, but the opening and ending themes? Is it also censorship when Disney localize the songs in their movies for international release?

if they do an proper translation? no.
if they replace the lyrics or the music with something else? yes.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Metallinatus

Quoting: elmapulnowadays companies are mora acountable when they censor stuff because we have internet and can get informed about it, but still, most people dont know about censorship that happened in the past, for example i went to one of the biggest anime conventions from Brasil called "Anime Friends" , there was going to happen an show from the artist "Rica Matusmoto" who many openings, endings from pokemon and other animes, and dub the main character satoshi (ash), there were people there cosplaying pokemon characters... you probably would guess that those people who went to the event knew her right? or knew about the censorship that hapened in this anime, the soundtrack replacement etc right? nope, most didnt, to this day.

*Sigh* it had to be a Brazilian...

A few season 1 episodes got censored here, and that is a popular bit of anime/Pokémon trivia on the internet, so it's silly to think that your average young anime fan doesn't know about it. But you think they don't know about it just because they don't know about the singer of endings that only aired in Japan? Dude.

And to make it worse you are comparing that to censorship? You really need to pick up a dictionary, dude. The Pokémon that aired here is (or was? I don't watch it anymore) the 4Kids version. They censored a bunch of crap in every anime you could imagine, everybody knows that, but replacing the Japanese themes with localized ones is definitely not censorship.

i count as censorship, they didnt believed the original songs would make an success and didnt give it a chance to show its potential.
but regardless, that was not the only change they made.
for example, in they cut "violence" when kasumi (mist) slaps the main character, among other things, replaced all the dialouges from the first movie and many dialougues in other episodes, censored an pen because it was an real product among other things.
i wont list all the changes, there is the webpage dogasu for that, take a look at the kangaskhan episode for example.
or the first movie where they replaced everything.

what is censorship in your opinion? censoring political opinion?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapulbut most of the time the changes arent trying to censor something for another audience that is bothered by this type of content

The SICs always makes this claim but is there any evidence what so ever that the devs made this change for "another audience" and not just because they themselves begun to feel uncomfortable with the original design?

i dont know what SIC means, but the staff changed completely afaik, the new staff have 0 respect for what came before then or the original target audience.

Appears to be exactly the same team minus one guy that where accused of sexual abuse at the work place by the staff. Still see no evidence that they are trying to cater to "a new audience", and honestly this line of reasoning is fast becoming old, that "other audience" that SICs keep on talking about are just some small group of marginalized women with strange hair colours that have zero power and zero reach yet we are somehow to believe that they in secret are "taking away our games, movies and comics". Stop falling for SIC (Social Injustice Crusader) propaganda, that is all that it is.

the public that purchased the game as it was liked it as it was, so yes, changing it is catering to a new audience.
the fact that a lot of things are geting censored nowadays is not an conspiration theory.

yes it is a conspiracy theory. Just look at this very game, you keep on saying that it was censored for "another audience" which is just a dog-whistle for "woke left feminists" and now it suddenly is "oh the ones that bought it isn't happy so it must be for a new audience", well to begin with you have not asked 100% of the people who bought it and secondly a game is always sold to new people (it's not like the same person is buying the game twice), so this explanation does not make sense.

And this is not censuring, this is simply a company not wanting to be associated with nazi-symbology and panty shots of underage characters. Censuring would be a 3rd party forcing the company to make these changes (and by strict definition that 3d part would have to be the government), a company changing their mind is a whole different story.

Like with Star Wars, Han no longer shooting first is not censuring, that is Lucas changing his mind. Now we might not like his change (I know that I don't) but not liking it does not make it censuring. Stephen King decided to withdraw Rage after the 1997 Heath High School shooting, his own decision as a creator and owner and not censorship.

wh would purchase this game if they didnt like the content from it? hell, we had 10 years of this game being sold and now they decide to change it?
why would this thirdy party have to be an government? sony changed their terms and enforced censorship in thirdy party content and many companies cant afford to give up an huge market like playstation and still survive so they were forced to self censor to comply.
sony purchased Evo btw.
its easy to say the company chose to self censor without external pressure from other companies, but who can guarantee they arent being censored in saying how they really feel about having to do that?
a lot of companies self censoring must be an gigantic coincidence right? or maybe some external pressure from bigger companies , what make more sense?
what is next, rockstar will make an patch so you cant kill any one anymore in GTA? and you will say that is not censorship?

of course people dont buy the same game twice (lets ignore nintendo, they arent an relevant company...)
irony aside, of course they want to sell to new people, but you know what companies do when they cant sell any more copies of an game? relase an new game, an sequel, another franchise, and no one get pissed off.
they dont remove content from existing games.
now you have all the right in the world to think "this content isnt moraly acceptable and should be there to begin with" but if you think that about an product and still purchase it anyway, that says a lot about you.
so yes, they are trying to target an new audience, not the ones who purchased this game in the last 10 years.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: kit89

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapulbut most of the time the changes arent trying to censor something for another audience that is bothered by this type of content

The SICs always makes this claim but is there any evidence what so ever that the devs made this change for "another audience" and not just because they themselves begun to feel uncomfortable with the original design?

i dont know what SIC means, but the staff changed completely afaik, the new staff have 0 respect for what came before then or the original target audience.

Appears to be exactly the same team minus one guy that where accused of sexual abuse at the work place by the staff. Still see no evidence that they are trying to cater to "a new audience", and honestly this line of reasoning is fast becoming old, that "other audience" that SICs keep on talking about are just some small group of marginalized women with strange hair colours that have zero power and zero reach yet we are somehow to believe that they in secret are "taking away our games, movies and comics". Stop falling for SIC (Social Injustice Crusader) propaganda, that is all that it is.

the public that purchased the game as it was liked it as it was, so yes, changing it is catering to a new audience.
the fact that a lot of things are geting censored nowadays is not an conspiration theory.

Things have always been censored, in fact it could be argued that fewer things are censored these days considering the amount of media content generated by the average joe instead of a large media corporation.

For example, an episode of Star Trek TNG was not aired/edited in the UK (back when it was originally released) as it proclaimed the reunification of Ireland by 2024. You can now watch it on Netflix in its full unedited glory.

nowadays companies are mora acountable when they censor stuff because we have internet and can get informed about it, but still, most people dont know about censorship that happened in the past, for example i went to one of the biggest anime conventions from Brasil called "Anime Friends" , there was going to happen an show from the artist "Rica Matusmoto" who many openings, endings from pokemon and other animes, and dub the main character satoshi (ash), there were people there cosplaying pokemon characters... you probably would guess that those people who went to the event knew her right? or knew about the censorship that hapened in this anime, the soundtrack replacement etc right? nope, most didnt, to this day.

nowadays the backslash is imediatly but still not enough to convince companies to not do this anymore in most cases so what is the point?
the only case i know about were an company gave up on censoring due to the backslash was back to the future.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapulbut most of the time the changes arent trying to censor something for another audience that is bothered by this type of content

The SICs always makes this claim but is there any evidence what so ever that the devs made this change for "another audience" and not just because they themselves begun to feel uncomfortable with the original design?

i dont know what SIC means, but the staff changed completely afaik, the new staff have 0 respect for what came before then or the original target audience.

Appears to be exactly the same team minus one guy that where accused of sexual abuse at the work place by the staff. Still see no evidence that they are trying to cater to "a new audience", and honestly this line of reasoning is fast becoming old, that "other audience" that SICs keep on talking about are just some small group of marginalized women with strange hair colours that have zero power and zero reach yet we are somehow to believe that they in secret are "taking away our games, movies and comics". Stop falling for SIC (Social Injustice Crusader) propaganda, that is all that it is.

the public that purchased the game as it was liked it as it was, so yes, changing it is catering to a new audience.
the fact that a lot of things are geting censored nowadays is not an conspiration theory.

View this comment - View article - View full comments