...What's the likelihood of reading a text that requires immediate action on your part? And if it does, then the 'look' isn't so brief anymore....
So, you can't answer the question? I can remain alert enough to be safe an briefly look at my phone while at a complete stop at an intersection....
That's the crux of people's problem with your statement. We have no proof beyond your [AC] word that your admitted distractedness at a stop light would NEVER spill over into distractedness while the car is moving - that an important message you choose to look at when safely stopped would NEVER make you continue reading or respond while the car is unsafely moving. We have no reason to trust your self-diagnosis of your safety, because individuals are terrible at self-diagnosing their own bad habits, as shown by the article where clearly distracted drivers (like FaceTime while driving) think they are very to extremely safe drivers. If you choose to walk on that slippery slope, then others are justified in questioning it that choice.
That said, I sincerely hope that what you say is true and if it is, then thank you. Drive safe... we all depend on it.
I agree with the "pervasive tracking" sentiment but not for the same reason... I suspect Amazon doesn't like that it's harder to track cash-paying customers and any products they buy, touch or even pause near in the store... That sort of data on individual buying behavior is invaluable... especially if they connect individual in-store purchasing habits to their online purchasing habits.
Also, I don't believe any excuses that technology to accept and dispense cash automatically is not ready. Most grocery stores around me have self-checkouts that accept cash and dispense change. I've used them and they work well. Lots of vending machines can handle bills and change too. Heck, even some local gas station convenience stores (Wawa) have automatic change dispensers at the [staffed] cashier counter just to speed up check-out. If Amazon doesn't want to use the same systems, they probably have reasons they don't want to discuss openly...
Just in case you (or others) didn't get the reference/joke above... negative teen behavior was often attributed to heavy metal music's alleged "bad" influence. Most notably in the aftermath of the 1999 Columbine shootings, where artists like Marilyn Manson, KMFDM, Ramstein, and Nine Inch Nails were discussed by news networks and even on the US Senate floor as factors in the shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No, they don't. I'm the parent of a school age kid, and I was surprised at how many fellow parents basically didn't know up or down on a computer. Plenty of people born in the 70s, 80s have hardly played a computer game ever.
Exactly... The Slashdot echo chamber does not reflect the average person. People born in the 70's or 80's who as children/teenagers were computers savvy, active online, or played video games were often considered geeks, nerds, or worse by most of their peers at the time; and a majority of that generation(s) tried to avoid the negative stigma as child/teenager by avoiding the technology and games. Now as parents they have little to no experience with the devices, internet, and games their children are using. Furthermore, even parents who have experience with games and the internet from their youth probably underestimate the pull of the social networks inside games like Fortnite have on their children. The experience of Fortnite is very different than games that were popular when they were kids (e.g. Super Mario Bros., Sonic, Mega Man, Final Fantasy, Doom, Half-life, Diablo, Halo, etc.).
Yeah, I think there's enough interest to make this work in Philly (I live in the area, Philly 'burbs). Particularly, if the venue fills in the calendar with other non-gaming events. Heck, if they aired the Eagles games there live, I bet many folks would go tailgate, and watch at Fusion in the same parking lot for a better view of the game than seats at the Linc.
Relatedly, I bet there are musicians who would want to take advantage of the visual potential of a small/intimate venue filled with screens. There's a lot of potential for a venue like that beyond eSports.
Hopefully they can make the acoustics work... I'd imagine a 3,500 seat room filled with screens presents a unique acoustic challenge (lots of hard, reflective surfaces).
Its also generally questionable about whether it makes financial sense to have a dedicated space, notice how many professional teams share buildings, and rent them out to concerts.
You only needed read the summary to see they will use the space to host other special events, TED talks, concerts, etc.
I don't see this working out. There's no way that the latency would allow for a playable game under any conditions.
It probably will not work for the twitch-style games, but there's plenty of more casual games, turn-based, RPGs, simple platformers, retro-remakes, etc. that latency would be manageable. These are also the sort of games that do well in mobile markets already. If you check Steam's library you'll find many games that are also available on iOS/Android stores and customers have to choose one or the other platform. Now Steam is both platforms. At the very least it helps retain customers in the Steam sphere, who might move out to other platforms.
Also, game developers may prefer designing games for PC/Steam to be streamed to mobile, instead of designing parallel iOS and Android versions of their games.
Could those with more expensive video cards also have researched or pay for an ISP with less latency?
Even assuming you could get the latency numbers, good luck having any choice in the matter of what ISP you use.
Could those with more expensive video cards also have high quality surround sound*?
A pair of $10 earbuds will do you better than an expensive surround sound setup. No crosstalk between ears means you might as well have a radar on your screen pointing at sounds.
Re: ISP... I have two ISP options where I live (suburbia). I understand that others may not have options.
Re: sound.... Agreed on a headphones > speaker system. I should have/meant to say good surround sound headphones, which can be costly, but definitely give an advantage... "a radar on your screen" [as you put it]... those with an expensive video card would probably invest in their sound.
Could it perhaps be that those with more expensive rigs are just more serious gamers who play more and are thus more skilled?
Don't stop there... Could those with more expensive video cards also have researched or pay for an ISP with less latency? Could those with more expensive video cards also have monitors with a faster refresh rate and better image quality? Could those with more expensive video cards also have high quality surround sound*? Could those with more expensive video cards also have better gaming-oriented peripherals (e.g. gaming mice, keyboards, etc.)?
Those are factors with more impact on K/D stats than whether your video card can push 100+ fps, but those with expensive video cards will likely cover those bases too.
* - Although sound might not seem related to visual response, high quality surround sound and knowledge of levels allows you to sense/predict/react to enemies or teammates before you even see them.
Seriously, though... when was the last time you bought a game on a physical disk? Services like Steam has pretty much made that obsolete.
^^ Bingo. Xbox digital distribution is 17 years behind Steam. The real question is...Why didn't Microsoft/Xbox or someone else do this a long time ago?
...designed for your living room. PC gamers have been buying/playing digitally distributed games this way for years through Steam. Set the pitchforks down. It's no big deal, in fact, it's preferred. Eventually you appreciate the lack of game boxes and disk clutter collecting dust in your home. Game pricing will be more dynamic and overall cheaper (like they are on Steam) because studios don't have to pay physical packaging and shipping, and they bypass brick-and-mortar stores whose real interest is selling used copies of games over and over again. The only people who should fear the digital Xbox is Gamestop....and tin-hatters, but that goes without saying, they already fear everything.
The side-effect of that is that though is that I've also lowered the value that television-based entertainment has in my life. I'm down to just two hours per day now, and I can go long periods of time without watching anything.
Do you play video games? Because Netflix stated recently they are in tough competition with video games for people's time, particularly with consumers 40 years old.
Yeah... many people forget that libraries have lots of DVDs available to borrow. The next series I'm going watch is The Expanse and the best/cheapest place for me to get it is my local library. The [surviving] libraries are evolving beyond just books.
It would be nice if no matter who got elected, things basically stayed the same.
In regards to the EPA [and other large gov't agencies] you have a system that will basically stay the same. An administrator of the EPA is not all powerful, and there are lots of existing laws, policies and active projects the administrator has no control over. Steering the EPA is like steering a massive ocean cargo boat at full speed, there's a limit to how quickly the captain can change course. That can be good or bad depending on your view... if you want things to stay mostly the same, it's good; if you want the EPA to be nimble and dynamic, it's bad. At any rate, Andrew Wheeler's appointment, like Scott Pruit's before, won't drastically change the EPA (but that doesn't make a good news story).
As a PC gamer [without an Xbox] I would have been more open to the integration of Xbox with Windows 10 if it was more complete from the start and not just bloat/spy ware. I upgraded to Windows 10 a couple years ago and found the Xbox app installed, which I poked around in out of curiosity... I'm not a MS hater and I'll give anything a chance. Xbox offered a game recording feature I didn't want, features for an Xbox Live account I didn't have or want, ads for Microsoft games I didn't want, and irrelevant system notifications. It was disabled promptly.
I got to ask... did the researchers find any actual damage done? Because that's what's important and I do not see that relayed in the article. When I read the article I saw of words/clauses like [paraphrasing]... 'may/could/can do harm'...'potential effect'...'elevated risk'... 'our model predicts'... 'link to effect'... etc. None of which mean environmental damage is occurring. The closest this article comes to stating actual environmental damage is this: "...Carbamazepine has been linked to disrupting the development of fish eggs and shellfish digestive processes, and the study found potential risks were most pronounced in arid areas with a few major streams...." So, not confirmed damages but probably not good. However, the last paragraph of the article says: "...Our model predicts a relatively high environmental risk for eco-regions in densely populated and dry areas... yet those are precisely the areas where there is little data..." So, where there is the most potential for damage [i.e. dry/arid areas], they have the least data to support a conclusion.
This is a fluff piece.
In fairness to the study/researchers, media reporting of environmental issues is usually horrible. The study may have been excellent, conclusive, and clearly stated the uncertainties; but was butchered by a non-technical journalist and/or editor meeting a deadline.
...get tired of hearing the same songs in the same order every day...
"My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion still triggers bad memories from about 20 years when I worked part-time at a grocery store in high school. My area (seafood department) had a ceiling speaker a few feet above my head. The constant repetitive music was the worst part of the job.
It seems to me that bringing in vast dollar amounts for collecting fossils should be a good thing for paleontology. More money should mean more resources to dig them up, increasing the overall supply of fossils available to humans to study...
It's already happening. More fossils are available for study now, which is great, even if some go to private collections. However, it's creating some challenges for scientists to good information; and museums who want to display fossils for the public have more competition. NPR's Planet Money had a great podcast on the subject... https://www.npr.org/sections/m... It's a 20 minute episode and well worth listening to [and RTFA] if anyone cares enough to comment here. Fossils have unique issues and without educating yourself it's easy to fall into ideological camps of science/public interest vs free markets; but if either ideology is allowed to dictate how we handle fossils we will all suffer. The best policy will be a blend.
Been the staple of a couple MMOs already for years. Or is it a story because Fortnite?
Agreed, but to expand on that... it becomes news [again] because Fortnite is so much larger than previous MMOs and is part of mainstream culture in a way that previous MMOs never were. For millions of average adults Fortnite is a new concept they are trying to wrap their mind around; and idea that Fortnite can be more than just a harmless game their kids play is news for them [albeit, not "news for nerds"].
I would say that if flowers and other plants can 'hear', they are likely only going to be able to hear things that increase their chances of reproduction and survival.
Flowers responding to sound/vibrations isn't so wild if you think of Venus fly traps, which have small hair-like structures that sense movement and create electrical signals to trigger the trap to close. (Details: https://www.livescience.com/15... ) If there is a survival advantage to detecting and attracting pollinators, then maybe there is a similar mechanism to release nectar or pollen tuned to insect-specific sound frequencies/vibrations.
You underestimate the number of underserved rural customers. It could be profitable without taking away a single customer that already had true broadband.
Exactly. Not just rural US and EU customers either... think of all the under-served rural customers in the entire world. Urban/Suburban folks are not going to be the target consumer.
Since they are going to go after all these games that prey on people's poor impulse control, are they going to go after CCGs, like Magic the Gathering and Pokimon? You know, the original loot box games that have been played by children for the past twenty years?
I wish could mod up. Great point.
Kids still need to be given money or access to money [via credit card] by their parents to make these purchases. Regardless of whether the product is digital or physical the underlying process and values are identical.
...A game needs all the items available without feeding it cash. We already did that when we bought it...
No, you did not. You are not paying attention. If you play Fortnite (as stated in the subject line ^^ ) you did not buy it because Fortnite is free to play, and generates revenue with in-game transactions, which may include randomized loot boxes, as discussed in the original article.
I completely understand why the business model of Free to Play with in-game transactions is disliked by many [myself included], but get over it. It's here. The market has spoken. Consumers spending their cash speaks many times louder than folks shaking their canes and explaining to us how things should be. This is reality. Please join us.
Because every website that has a Facebook Like button on it is sending information about you back to Facebook. Because every website that loads Facebook Javascript is sending information about you back to Facebook.
There are dozens of other companies on the Internet which collect your information without your consent. Facebook is not the worst offender and if everyone's so concerned, we must enact the laws which make information gathering illegal in general vs. persecuting Facebook alone.
Agreed... Facebook is just the most obvious scapegoat at the moment, but Facebook tracking is not unique. If I move my eyes 4 inches to the right on this screen I see a Google-powered ad for a product I looked at last week. And in Google's case I didn't choose to be part of a social media platform (not explicitly, at least) knowing they would track me.
Slashdot Mirror
...What's the likelihood of reading a text that requires immediate action on your part? And if it does, then the 'look' isn't so brief anymore....
So, you can't answer the question? I can remain alert enough to be safe an briefly look at my phone while at a complete stop at an intersection. ...
That's the crux of people's problem with your statement. We have no proof beyond your [AC] word that your admitted distractedness at a stop light would NEVER spill over into distractedness while the car is moving - that an important message you choose to look at when safely stopped would NEVER make you continue reading or respond while the car is unsafely moving. We have no reason to trust your self-diagnosis of your safety, because individuals are terrible at self-diagnosing their own bad habits, as shown by the article where clearly distracted drivers (like FaceTime while driving) think they are very to extremely safe drivers. If you choose to walk on that slippery slope, then others are justified in questioning it that choice.
That said, I sincerely hope that what you say is true and if it is, then thank you. Drive safe... we all depend on it.
I agree with the "pervasive tracking" sentiment but not for the same reason... I suspect Amazon doesn't like that it's harder to track cash-paying customers and any products they buy, touch or even pause near in the store... That sort of data on individual buying behavior is invaluable... especially if they connect individual in-store purchasing habits to their online purchasing habits.
Also, I don't believe any excuses that technology to accept and dispense cash automatically is not ready. Most grocery stores around me have self-checkouts that accept cash and dispense change. I've used them and they work well. Lots of vending machines can handle bills and change too. Heck, even some local gas station convenience stores (Wawa) have automatic change dispensers at the [staffed] cashier counter just to speed up check-out. If Amazon doesn't want to use the same systems, they probably have reasons they don't want to discuss openly...
nothing wrong with heavy metal.
Agreed 100%.
Just in case you (or others) didn't get the reference/joke above... negative teen behavior was often attributed to heavy metal music's alleged "bad" influence. Most notably in the aftermath of the 1999 Columbine shootings, where artists like Marilyn Manson, KMFDM, Ramstein, and Nine Inch Nails were discussed by news networks and even on the US Senate floor as factors in the shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Bullshit knee-jerk reactions, of course.
No, they don't. I'm the parent of a school age kid, and I was surprised at how many fellow parents basically didn't know up or down on a computer. Plenty of people born in the 70s, 80s have hardly played a computer game ever.
Exactly... The Slashdot echo chamber does not reflect the average person. People born in the 70's or 80's who as children/teenagers were computers savvy, active online, or played video games were often considered geeks, nerds, or worse by most of their peers at the time; and a majority of that generation(s) tried to avoid the negative stigma as child/teenager by avoiding the technology and games. Now as parents they have little to no experience with the devices, internet, and games their children are using. Furthermore, even parents who have experience with games and the internet from their youth probably underestimate the pull of the social networks inside games like Fortnite have on their children. The experience of Fortnite is very different than games that were popular when they were kids (e.g. Super Mario Bros., Sonic, Mega Man, Final Fantasy, Doom, Half-life, Diablo, Halo, etc.).
Or anonymously trolling Slashdot's "FAKE NEWS" writing millennial morons!
Yeah, I think there's enough interest to make this work in Philly (I live in the area, Philly 'burbs). Particularly, if the venue fills in the calendar with other non-gaming events. Heck, if they aired the Eagles games there live, I bet many folks would go tailgate, and watch at Fusion in the same parking lot for a better view of the game than seats at the Linc.
Relatedly, I bet there are musicians who would want to take advantage of the visual potential of a small/intimate venue filled with screens. There's a lot of potential for a venue like that beyond eSports.
Hopefully they can make the acoustics work... I'd imagine a 3,500 seat room filled with screens presents a unique acoustic challenge (lots of hard, reflective surfaces).
Its also generally questionable about whether it makes financial sense to have a dedicated space, notice how many professional teams share buildings, and rent them out to concerts.
You only needed read the summary to see they will use the space to host other special events, TED talks, concerts, etc.
I don't see this working out. There's no way that the latency would allow for a playable game under any conditions.
It probably will not work for the twitch-style games, but there's plenty of more casual games, turn-based, RPGs, simple platformers, retro-remakes, etc. that latency would be manageable. These are also the sort of games that do well in mobile markets already. If you check Steam's library you'll find many games that are also available on iOS/Android stores and customers have to choose one or the other platform. Now Steam is both platforms. At the very least it helps retain customers in the Steam sphere, who might move out to other platforms.
Also, game developers may prefer designing games for PC/Steam to be streamed to mobile, instead of designing parallel iOS and Android versions of their games.
Could those with more expensive video cards also have researched or pay for an ISP with less latency?
Even assuming you could get the latency numbers, good luck having any choice in the matter of what ISP you use.
Could those with more expensive video cards also have high quality surround sound*?
A pair of $10 earbuds will do you better than an expensive surround sound setup. No crosstalk between ears means you might as well have a radar on your screen pointing at sounds.
Re: ISP... I have two ISP options where I live (suburbia). I understand that others may not have options.
Re: sound.... Agreed on a headphones > speaker system. I should have/meant to say good surround sound headphones, which can be costly, but definitely give an advantage... "a radar on your screen" [as you put it]... those with an expensive video card would probably invest in their sound.
Could it perhaps be that those with more expensive rigs are just more serious gamers who play more and are thus more skilled?
Don't stop there...
Could those with more expensive video cards also have researched or pay for an ISP with less latency?
Could those with more expensive video cards also have monitors with a faster refresh rate and better image quality?
Could those with more expensive video cards also have high quality surround sound*?
Could those with more expensive video cards also have better gaming-oriented peripherals (e.g. gaming mice, keyboards, etc.)?
Those are factors with more impact on K/D stats than whether your video card can push 100+ fps, but those with expensive video cards will likely cover those bases too.
* - Although sound might not seem related to visual response, high quality surround sound and knowledge of levels allows you to sense/predict/react to enemies or teammates before you even see them.
Seriously, though... when was the last time you bought a game on a physical disk? Services like Steam has pretty much made that obsolete.
^^ Bingo. Xbox digital distribution is 17 years behind Steam.
The real question is...Why didn't Microsoft/Xbox or someone else do this a long time ago?
...designed for your living room. PC gamers have been buying/playing digitally distributed games this way for years through Steam. Set the pitchforks down. It's no big deal, in fact, it's preferred. Eventually you appreciate the lack of game boxes and disk clutter collecting dust in your home. Game pricing will be more dynamic and overall cheaper (like they are on Steam) because studios don't have to pay physical packaging and shipping, and they bypass brick-and-mortar stores whose real interest is selling used copies of games over and over again. The only people who should fear the digital Xbox is Gamestop....and tin-hatters, but that goes without saying, they already fear everything.
The side-effect of that is that though is that I've also lowered the value that television-based entertainment has in my life. I'm down to just two hours per day now, and I can go long periods of time without watching anything.
Do you play video games? Because Netflix stated recently they are in tough competition with video games for people's time, particularly with consumers 40 years old.
Check your local library....
Yeah... many people forget that libraries have lots of DVDs available to borrow. The next series I'm going watch is The Expanse and the best/cheapest place for me to get it is my local library. The [surviving] libraries are evolving beyond just books.
It would be nice if no matter who got elected, things basically stayed the same.
In regards to the EPA [and other large gov't agencies] you have a system that will basically stay the same. An administrator of the EPA is not all powerful, and there are lots of existing laws, policies and active projects the administrator has no control over. Steering the EPA is like steering a massive ocean cargo boat at full speed, there's a limit to how quickly the captain can change course. That can be good or bad depending on your view... if you want things to stay mostly the same, it's good; if you want the EPA to be nimble and dynamic, it's bad. At any rate, Andrew Wheeler's appointment, like Scott Pruit's before, won't drastically change the EPA (but that doesn't make a good news story).
As a PC gamer [without an Xbox] I would have been more open to the integration of Xbox with Windows 10 if it was more complete from the start and not just bloat/spy ware. I upgraded to Windows 10 a couple years ago and found the Xbox app installed, which I poked around in out of curiosity... I'm not a MS hater and I'll give anything a chance. Xbox offered a game recording feature I didn't want, features for an Xbox Live account I didn't have or want, ads for Microsoft games I didn't want, and irrelevant system notifications. It was disabled promptly.
I got to ask... did the researchers find any actual damage done? Because that's what's important and I do not see that relayed in the article. When I read the article I saw of words/clauses like [paraphrasing]... 'may/could/can do harm'...'potential effect'...'elevated risk'... 'our model predicts'... 'link to effect'... etc. None of which mean environmental damage is occurring. The closest this article comes to stating actual environmental damage is this:
"...Carbamazepine has been linked to disrupting the development of fish eggs and shellfish digestive processes, and the study found potential risks were most pronounced in arid areas with a few major streams...."
So, not confirmed damages but probably not good. However, the last paragraph of the article says:
"...Our model predicts a relatively high environmental risk for eco-regions in densely populated and dry areas... yet those are precisely the areas where there is little data..."
So, where there is the most potential for damage [i.e. dry/arid areas], they have the least data to support a conclusion.
This is a fluff piece.
In fairness to the study/researchers, media reporting of environmental issues is usually horrible. The study may have been excellent, conclusive, and clearly stated the uncertainties; but was butchered by a non-technical journalist and/or editor meeting a deadline.
...get tired of hearing the same songs in the same order every day...
"My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion still triggers bad memories from about 20 years when I worked part-time at a grocery store in high school. My area (seafood department) had a ceiling speaker a few feet above my head. The constant repetitive music was the worst part of the job.
It seems to me that bringing in vast dollar amounts for collecting fossils should be a good thing for paleontology. More money should mean more resources to dig them up, increasing the overall supply of fossils available to humans to study...
It's already happening. More fossils are available for study now, which is great, even if some go to private collections. However, it's creating some challenges for scientists to good information; and museums who want to display fossils for the public have more competition. NPR's Planet Money had a great podcast on the subject... https://www.npr.org/sections/m...
It's a 20 minute episode and well worth listening to [and RTFA] if anyone cares enough to comment here. Fossils have unique issues and without educating yourself it's easy to fall into ideological camps of science/public interest vs free markets; but if either ideology is allowed to dictate how we handle fossils we will all suffer. The best policy will be a blend.
Been the staple of a couple MMOs already for years. Or is it a story because Fortnite?
Agreed, but to expand on that... it becomes news [again] because Fortnite is so much larger than previous MMOs and is part of mainstream culture in a way that previous MMOs never were. For millions of average adults Fortnite is a new concept they are trying to wrap their mind around; and idea that Fortnite can be more than just a harmless game their kids play is news for them [albeit, not "news for nerds"].
I would say that if flowers and other plants can 'hear', they are likely only going to be able to hear things that increase their chances of reproduction and survival.
Flowers responding to sound/vibrations isn't so wild if you think of Venus fly traps, which have small hair-like structures that sense movement and create electrical signals to trigger the trap to close. (Details: https://www.livescience.com/15... ) If there is a survival advantage to detecting and attracting pollinators, then maybe there is a similar mechanism to release nectar or pollen tuned to insect-specific sound frequencies/vibrations.
Armchair science is fun!
You underestimate the number of underserved rural customers. It could be profitable without taking away a single customer that already had true broadband.
Exactly. Not just rural US and EU customers either... think of all the under-served rural customers in the entire world. Urban/Suburban folks are not going to be the target consumer.
Since they are going to go after all these games that prey on people's poor impulse control, are they going to go after CCGs, like Magic the Gathering and Pokimon? You know, the original loot box games that have been played by children for the past twenty years?
I wish could mod up. Great point.
Kids still need to be given money or access to money [via credit card] by their parents to make these purchases. Regardless of whether the product is digital or physical the underlying process and values are identical.
...A game needs all the items available without feeding it cash. We already did that when we bought it...
No, you did not. You are not paying attention. If you play Fortnite (as stated in the subject line ^^ ) you did not buy it because Fortnite is free to play, and generates revenue with in-game transactions, which may include randomized loot boxes, as discussed in the original article.
I completely understand why the business model of Free to Play with in-game transactions is disliked by many [myself included], but get over it. It's here. The market has spoken. Consumers spending their cash speaks many times louder than folks shaking their canes and explaining to us how things should be. This is reality. Please join us.
There are dozens of other companies on the Internet which collect your information without your consent. Facebook is not the worst offender and if everyone's so concerned, we must enact the laws which make information gathering illegal in general vs. persecuting Facebook alone.
Agreed... Facebook is just the most obvious scapegoat at the moment, but Facebook tracking is not unique. If I move my eyes 4 inches to the right on this screen I see a Google-powered ad for a product I looked at last week. And in Google's case I didn't choose to be part of a social media platform (not explicitly, at least) knowing they would track me.