Matt Patches, Polygon, reporting on Netflix’s latest quarterly earnings report:

[…] Netflix estimated that it commands 10 percent of television screen time in the U.S., and slightly less than that for total mobile screen time. In other countries, the percentages are lower due to “lower penetration of our service.” The reason, Netflix said, isn’t because of obvious streaming competition, but of online platforms and video games.

“We compete with (and lose to) Fortnite more than HBO,” the report indicated. 

By the end of 2018, Netflix claimed nearly 139 million paying memberships worldwide. Meanwhile, in November 2018, Epic reported that its blockbuster battle royale game commanded upwards of 200 million registered users. In its quarterly report, Netflix made clear that “consumer screen time” is its most valuable metric, and that *Fortnite* – just one of endless options for plugged-in audiences – offers the stiffest competition.

That Fortnite impacts Netflix more than HBO should be a clear indicator as to why Netflix expects to spend almost $15 billion on content this year. Netflix isn’t competing with HBO because HBO also makes content, Netflix competes with HBO because when you’re watching HBO you’re not watching Netflix. Sure, you could be paying for both, but once the attention scales tip too far in one direction, people begin to wonder if they really need that extra monthly subscription. Where attention goes, money follows.

This is why features like Screen Time on iOS are so interesting to me–they provide cold, hard numbers as to where I’m actually spending my time. Like Mint or YNAB for your minutes. An attention budget.

It’s not just screen things, either. Netflix shows, Facebook status updates, Fortnite matches, wood carving, genoise sponge cake baking are all–in some manner–competing for your attention. The attention economy posits that as content becomes increasingly available, attention (read: time) becomes a scarce commodity. If 200 million people started regularly baking genoise in the evenings instead of watching Netflix, you can bet we’d hear Reed Hastings say “sponge cakes” in the next quarterly report.

(Once you start thinking about the digital services and apps we use as primarily chasing your attention instead of your dollars, it becomes easier to see how addictive and downright manipulating some of these user interfaces have become. But that’s for another post.)

Final nail, meet coffin.

Here with the follow-up to their announcement last September is CTO and co-founder of Basecamp, David Heinemeier Hansson:

These days Medium is focused on their membership offering, though. Trying to aggregate writing from many sources and sell a broad subscription on top of that. And it’s a neat model, and it’s wonderful to see Medium try something different. But it’s not for us, and it’s not for Signal v Noise. […]

Beyond that, though, we’ve grown ever more aware of the problems with centralizing the internet. Traditional blogs might have swung out of favor, as we all discovered the benefits of social media and aggregating platforms, but we think they’re about to swing back in style, as we all discover the real costs and problems brought by such centralization. […]

That doesn’t mean we regret our time at Medium. Being on Medium helped propel some of our best writing to a whole new audience. But these days there’s less of a “what Medium is doing for us”, and a whole lot more of “what we’re doing for Medium”. It was a good time while it lasted, but good times are gone.

Their new site is powered by WordPress and it looks freaking great. The theme was designed by Basecamp’s in-house designer Adam Stoddard, and I’m really digging his choice to set everything in Tiempos. (I mean, go look at those big, bold, beautiful headlines.)

Unfortunately, Basecamp wasn’t able to export any of the comments on their old posts. This is disappointing because SvN comments are those rare type of comments you actually want to read. To have them locked forever in Medium is a not-insignificant loss.

As far as traditional blogs swinging “back into style”, I do hope that’s the case. Most of my favorite, non-news Internet content is the work of around 20 different writers, programmers, designers, and thinkers that I’ve stumbled across and subscribed to over the years. I list a few of my favorites over here.

As a side note: If you’re new to the blogging scene, welcome. There’s never been a better time to start writing your own site, nor have there been more platforms and frameworks that give you control over your content and its presentation. And if you need help? Shoot me an email—I’d love to help you out.

Looks like Doist started with Medium in 2017, and then switched to WP Engine—a WordPress hosting service—earlier this month.

(You might not recognize Doist-the-company, but you’ve probably heard of their most popular product: Todoist, the much loved cross-platform task manager.)

Russell Brandom, The Verge:

Yubico has announced a new version of its popular Security Key for use in Lightning ports, the first such device to enable physical token authentication for iPhones. The device also supports a USB-C connection.

Previously, the only way to connect a security key to an iPhone was over Bluetooth, which suffered Bluetooth’s normal usability issues as well as potential security concerns around mistaken pairings. Android devices can also pair over NFC, but that functionality is impossible under iOS’s current NFC restrictions.

Yubico wasn’t likely to ever make a Lightning-only security key because these keys are most useful when they’re device agnostic. iOS apps will have to add support for these sorts of keys, but it’s still nice that a Bluetooth-free security key option now exists for iPhone users.

(Brief primer on security keys, because I both use and recommend them: While a house key gets you into your home and a car key is required to start your vehicle—a physical Yubico security key can be a required part of your login flow for email, social media, etc. This makes those accounts almost impossible to hack, because an attacker would need your physical key. Additionally, I’ve found most people are (a) more willing to use and (b) faster to understand the concept of a physical key for your email; whereas explaining two-factor authentication codes can often take a few rounds of drawing before the idea takes.)

I’ve recommended the code sharing/developer social network GitHub to many people (students and writers primarily), but the recommendation always came with the giant asterisk that everything you published would be public. It’s nice that’s no longer the case. GitHub becomes a far more attractive service—and stronger social network—when you can host all your work there.

This also makes a lot of sense for where Microsoft might want to take GitHub. The majority of GitHub’s future revenue is likely to come in the form of lucrative Enterprise accounts at large companies—something Microsoft is well positioned to push—rather than free (née personal) accounts that upgrade to paid tiers.

(This came at a good time for me too as I wanted to—finally—get my project files for Edit into their own GitHub repository. Hours after the announcement, I created a new private repository and got everything uploaded. This is going to make my development life so much better. Previously, the whole project was stuffed into a random Dropbox folder. The cobbler’s kids have no shoes, right?)

‘Nobody Reads’

This is the excuse I hear when product people are disappointed that customers missed some important piece of information conveyed through UI copy. The more important the information missed, the stronger the sentiment that Nobody Reads.

But this is like when someone truncates Winston Churchill’s quote on democracy. It’s more likely you’ve heard this bit:

democracy is the worst form of Government

Than how it finishes:

except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Similarly, Nobody Reads… Bad Copy. If nobody is reading your copy, it means you need to work on the text more so the reader can work less.

Generally, the following attributes contribute to bad copy: too long, filled with jargon, without actionable steps, visually unfriendly.

(It’s worth noting that, sometimes, UI copy might not be the best way to convey a concept. Complex instructions might be better explained visually. Consider the context of what you’re trying to explain. Dates, durations, or similar concepts can benefit from a graphical aid.)

In most cases of bad copy, the solution is simple. Imagine a customer is in front of you, and then rewrite the copy as though you were delivering the instructions audibly. Next, take what you’ve written and try to say it in half the words—remove anything that isn’t necessary. Finally, read what you have aloud to someone else. Cut and rewrite based on their feedback.

This process can take longer than you think. Make sure to budget time for copy revisions just as you would mockups. Going through three, five, or 10 drafts of important language isn’t a bad thing if 10,000 people are going to read the result.

Tom Warren, The Verge, on the news that not only is Microsoft rebuilding Edge on Chromium, but they’re also bringing it to the Mac:

A lot of web developers use a Mac to develop and test sites, but Edge doesn’t exist there, and it’s currently difficult to test Microsoft’s web rendering engine on a Mac without dual booting Windows. Microsoft is now bringing Edge to the Mac. We understand it’s not a move designed to grab more market share specifically; it’s more about making it easier for developers to test Edge. Microsoft hasn’t committed to a specific date for Edge on the Mac, but we expect to see it later next year.

I sort of get the argument here, and I’m not against more browsers on MacOS, but (at least for the foreseeable future) any websites that work in Chrome should also work in the built-on-Chromium Edge. You likely won’t need to test a site in both browsers because they’re—largely—using the same engine.

(Fun fact: it’s been 15 years since Microsoft stopped developing Internet Explorer for Mac.)

Microsoft is exiting the browser engine market, and the next version of their Edge browser will be powered by Chromium; the Google-led open source web engine that powers Chrome. Ferdy Christant:

The web now runs on a single engine. There is not a single browser with a non-Chromium engine on mobile of any significance other than Safari. Which runs webkit, kind of the same engine as Chromium, which is based on webkit.

On desktop, Edge’s departure from running their own engine, means there’s only one last man standing to counter the Chromium dominance: Firefox. Which is falling from a cliff, on its way to join the “everybody else” gang of insignificant browsers. With no serious way to truly counter it due to their near-absence on mobile, and their lack of control in pushing browser installs.

So Chromium it is. If you’re now waiting for a message of hope or a happy ending, I have none.

Go read the whole piece, because it’s a terrific overview of the current browser wars (if you can even still call it that) and the future of the open web.

I personally don’t like using Chrome, but I’m also on MacOS where Chrome isn’t what I would call the best example of a Mac app. Still, with around 70% market share and the nearest competitor only holding about 10%, Chrome doesn’t have to woo me to win.

And this is the crux of the issue. With Microsoft’s exit, Apple is the only company left with both the money and browser engine to push back against Google’s dominance. But as Mr. Christant points out, Safari’s market share is largely due to the popularity of iOS, and the browser often lags behind the others when it comes to updates. Apple seems content with where Safari’s at, because they don’t face any browser engine competition on iOS where all browsers (Chrome, Firefox, etc.) have to use the WebKit (Safari) rendering engine.

Finally, as I wrote last year, “Google controls the searches, the ads, and the window through which a majority of us see the internet.” With Microsoft’s adoption of Chromium, Google’s influence over how a majority of the world sees the Internet will only grow.

To put it another way, consider this. Last quarter, Google’s parent company Alphabet made just under $29 billion from ad revenue. Alphabet’s advertising business is far and away where the company gets a majority its money. Now think of how this ad-driven, privacy lax company controls the world’s most popular web browser with a near monopolistic amount of market share. Given that information, I find it hard to believe that Google will forever be an objective and faithful steward of what’s best for the web, instead of what’s best for Google—especially if their advertising chips are ever threatened. Thankfully, for us and for now, it seems like Google doesn’t have too much to worry about in that regard.

Oh, wait.

Brian Krebs:

Recent data from anti-phishing company PhishLabs shows that 49 percent of all phishing sites in the third quarter of 2018 bore the padlock security icon next to the phishing site domain name as displayed in a browser address bar. […]

This alarming shift is notable because a majority of Internet users have taken the age-old “look for the lock” advice to heart, and still associate the lock icon with legitimate sites. A PhishLabs survey conducted last year found more than 80% of respondents believed the green lock indicated a website was either legitimate and/or safe.

Years ago, I remember personally telling friends and family to “look for the lock” as an easy way of verifying that the site they were on was legitimate. Back then, paying for and setting up an SSL certificate was time consuming (or expensive) enough that most phishing websites didn’t bother. Those days are long gone.

I still believe that wide (and cheap) availability of SSL is a good and necessary thing. But all HTTPs and the accompanying lock symbol guarantees is that your connection with a sever is encrypted—not that you’re safe.

I’ve linked to Marvin Visions before, but I simply can’t get over how great this font looks. The latest update makes Marvin Visions available as a variable font, which means you have granular control over both weight and optical size without a dramatic increase in file size. There’s a two-dimensional slider about a quarter of the way down the page if you want to see what I mean.

Companies that aren’t tracking towards profitability either die or raise more cash—that’s obvious and not why I’m linking to this story. What makes this piece by Jim Edwards, Business Insider, interesting are the readership stats and hint towards future product direction for Medium:

The site currently has 90 million unique users each month, and publishes 20,000 articles per day, mostly from writers creating one-off articles. It recently moved away from selling advertising as a revenue model to a subscription paywall, in which readers are asked for money if they see more than three stories per month. […]

The investment will go into Williams’ effort to make Medium a bit more like a vast, thoughtful magazine. What started as a longform blogging platform is looking more and more like The Atlantic crossed with Wikipedia. Williams has a corp of editors who are paying fees or commissions to writers for high-quality material, and then keeping that high-quality content behind the paywall. While the majority of Medium’s writers are amateurs writing for coffee money, the professional work — which feels a lot like the journalism you’d see in a monthly magazine — will get much of the investment, he said.

(Some additional, unverified—but I trust them—stats from Twitter user Kontra add that Medium has around 20 million articles across the entire site.)

If Medium is to truly become a “vast, thoughtful magazine” then I think the days of using Medium as an online home for your identity and writing are stone cold dead. Find a new platform—many already are. Starting a blog on Medium today is the equivalent to buying a deed for a house that is already on fire.

Which, so long as you know what you’re getting into, is fine I guess. At least Medium is finally acknowledging that Medium is the brand, not you. In which case, a high-quality, diversely-written, and digital magazine sounds sort of compelling. With enough contributors and content, the law of large numbers suggests Medium editors could curate a fresh batch of good reads every day. Will it be good enough for people to pay, though?

And all of this sidesteps the fact that reading anything on Medium is a mess right now. If I’m not being interrupted to sign up for an account then the abundance of ancillary visual garbage taints what might otherwise be an OK reading experience. Add on the litany of trackers, analytics, and other JavaScript that every page seemingly requires and it’s, well, bullshit.

It’s gotten to the point that medium.com has joined linkedin.com as a URL that elicits Pavlovian-driven dread whenever there’s something there I want to read. Yet, regularly, there is something there I want to read, which at least for now seems to be one of the few positive things Medium has going for it.

Nick Statt, The Verge:

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales’ digital media company, the WikiTribune, is shifting its focus away from traditional news-gathering and moving to a “community oriented” strategy that prioritizes working with contributors. 

In the process, the company has laid off its 12 original editorial staffers, reports The Drum, following the April departure of CNN and Reuters journalist Peter Bale, who initially assembled the team. The WikiTribune began in August of last year, and Wales and his co-founder Orit Kopel posted a note to the site earlier this week first mentioning the “major personnel changes” and the reframing of its focus on the community.

The original idea was to have professional journalists working side-by-side with the community to create an ‘evidence-based’ news site. Without the editorial staff, how is WikiTribune any different from Wikipedia’s portal for current events or Wikinews?

Good eye from Marius Masalar. I doubt I’ll use this feature, though—especially since it requires physically connecting your Kindle to a computer and dragging font files around. For most texts (and most people), I think Amazon’s custom-made Bookerly is good enough.

Earlier this month, Google announced their intentions to publicly test a video game streaming technology called Project Stream. Beta testers would have the opportunity to stream Ubisoft’s latest blockbuster Assassin’s Creed in Google Chrome, so long as they had a 25 Mbps Internet connection and relatively low ping.

A week later, several outlets have had the chance to test Project Stream, and the results are positive:

Jason Schreier, Kotaku:

There’s something a little funky about playing a game like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey in your internet browser. It almost feels obscene, like you’re getting away with something that shouldn’t be legal. Google’s Project Stream might have some obstacles on the way to global dominance, but it’s still pretty damn impressive.

Sam Machkovech, Ars Technica:

What’s more, Project Stream’s source servers appear to render the game at near-max PC settings, especially in crucial categories like ambient occlusion and shadow-map resolution. (These categories, in particular, render at least “one higher” than their pro-console equivalents.) AC:O’s focus on lengthy dialogue trees—and, thus, tight zooms on human faces—is all the better when that shadow-and-light pipeline enjoys as many pixels and bounce opportunities as possible.

Austen Goslin, Polygon:

To say that the streaming service and its presentation of Assassin’s Creed Odyssey were impressive would be an understatement. Given the choice between playing the standard PC version of the game and the Project Stream version, I’d probably choose streaming. With Project Stream, the game launches a little quicker, and you only really lose the top end of quality. For those with the internet connection to play — but without a suitable computer to handle the traditional install — it’s hard to imagine a better setup than Project Stream, even in these early days.

Remember, we’re talking about streaming a massive, detailed AAA video game in a web browser. While there are already services that let you stream video games to your console or PC, the level of quality delivered via Project Stream is impressive. That it’s possible is a victory; that it’s graphically rich and enjoyable would be seemingly a triumph.

For those wondering why video games are more difficult to stream than the music and video we’ve had for years, here it is: video games require near instant response to user input. If you press a button to make your character jump and that action takes a full second to register, the game would be unplayable. Today’s video game consoles or PCs are mere feet from your controller or input devices, so input is received and registered instantaneously. A streaming service means the console/computer/server will be in another zip code, if not further away. If input lag isn’t measurable in milliseconds, there’s a problem.

So far, Project Stream seems to be handling delays relatively well, with little to no criticism from the testers. Granted, this is with a limited beta pool — who knows how tens or hundreds of thousands of players will affect the service — but the overall experience is doing much better than I would have guessed.

Looking forward and assuming streaming limitations are no longer a major obstacle, the only questions I have left are about price and competition. PlayStation and NVIDIA both already offer somewhat similar streaming services, and it’s not clear whether Google intends to be a consumer option or simply offer the technology to other companies. Regardless, Google’s message with Project Stream is clear: game on.

Customers, Not Users

A lot of software isn’t free. Plenty of people pay to use products. Yet, we call these people users in most of our copy and internal communications. Should we?

What if we tried calling them what they actually are: customers.

  • User story becomes customer story.
  • User review becomes customer review.
  • User issue becomes customer issue.

I think the difference is important. Facebook has users. We have customers. By referring to your customers as customers, you’re respecting the fact that someone is paying you for your work. We don’t need to sell customer data—their hard-earned dollars keep us running. Also, a sentence like “15 minutes of downtime” hits harder when you know it’s a customer on the other end.

You can argue that both paying and non-paying people are subsets of the generic user. And certainly, your company culture plays a larger role in whether you respect your customers (or users) than the terminology.

But I still think there’s something here. Someone, somewhere is paying us for our products. That’s a difference worth distinguishing.

One of my favorite features of the MacOS Finder is that I can display my folders and files in “column view,” where clicking on a folder in one column will reveal its contents in a column directly to the right. It’s a wonderfully efficient way to dig through your files, and up until today I had no idea this interface paradigm had a name.

Jacob Kastrenakes, The Verge:

In the past, Wi-Fi versions were identified by a letter or a pair of letters that referred to a wireless standard. The current version is 802.11ac, but before that, we had 802.11n, 802.11g, 802.11a, and 802.11b. It was not comprehensible, so the Wi-Fi Alliance — the group that stewards the implementation of Wi-Fi — is changing it.

All of those convoluted codenames are being changed. So instead of the current Wi-Fi being called 802.11ac, it’ll be called Wi-Fi 5 (because it’s the fifth version). It’ll probably make more sense this way, starting with the first version of Wi-Fi, 802.11b:

  • Wi-Fi 1: 802.11b (1999)
  • Wi-Fi 2: 802.11a (1999)
  • Wi-Fi 3: 802.11g (2003)
  • Wi-Fi 4: 802.11n (2009)
  • Wi-Fi 5: 802.11ac (2014)

What an excellent, clarifying change. I’m not sure anyone will, you know, actually refer to their Wi-Fi in this way (at least for a few years), but the previous naming scheme was as useless as it was unclear.

Author Joe Moran had quite a long-winded piece in The Guardian about writing, but this bit is worth saving:

A sentence is much more than its literal meaning. It is a living line of words where logic and lyric meet – a piece of both sense and sound, albeit the sound is only heard in the reader’s head. Rookie sentence-writers are often too busy worrying about the something they are trying to say and don’t worry enough about how that something looks and sounds. They look straight past the words into the meaning that they have strong-armed into them. They fasten on content and forget about form – forgetting that content and form are the same thing, that what a sentence says is the same as how it says it.

I’m all for excellent technical writing (see my style guide), but most of the writings I consider great have an almost lyrical quality to them.

According to Dunbar’s Number, “humans can comfortably maintain only 150 stable relationships.” Path, at its core, was a social network built around this idea. When the service launched, you could only have 50 friends. They later expanded that number to 150 (and then 500), but in those early years the network limitation forced you to only connect with people who really mattered to you. No old high school acquaintances, no business fan pages. Just you and your closest friends or family.1

Additionally, Path benefited from being an attractive competitor to Facebook at a time when you could get your friends and family to switch social networks. Today, Facebook’s too large to directly compete with, even if your defining feature is one they’d never want to copy. I want to believe the ideals of Path could be repackaged and relaunched today, but you would need a lot of money to keep a free social network afloat for long enough to maybe reach the critical mass necessary for advertising or subscriptions to sustain the service.

Anyhow — adieu, Path. You were the social network we needed but never deserved.


  1. Today, the only small (social) networks I find solace in—and enjoy, frankly—are iMessage groups and iCloud Shared Albums. ↩︎

Megan Farokhmanesh, The Verge:

Telltale Games, creators of episodic adventure games like The Walking DeadThe Wolf Among Us, and Batman: The Enemy Within, laid off a large number of its staff today. The company will retain a small team of 25. According to multiple sources The Verge spoke with, employees were let go with no severance.

“Today Telltale Games made the difficult decision to begin a majority studio closure following a year marked by insurmountable challenges,“ the company said in a statement. “A majority of the company’s employees were dismissed earlier this morning.” The remaining employees will stay on “to fulfill the company’s obligations to its board and partners,” according to Telltale.

Co-founder and former CEO Kevin Bruner (he left Telltale over a year ago), on his personal site:

Today, I’m mostly saddened for the people who are losing their jobs at a studio they love. And I’m also saddened at the loss of a studio that green-lit crazy ideas that no one else would consider. I’m comforted a bit knowing there are now so many new talented people and studios creating games in the evolving narrative genre. While I look forward to those games and new developments, and continuing to contribute, I will always find “A Telltale Game” to have been a unique offering.

This news comes several months after Ms. Farokhmanesh first reported on the turmoil inside of Telltale Games following their meteoric rise. Yet, a few months after Ms. Farokhmanesh’s reporting, the studio announced it had (among other developments) partnered with Netflix to create a game adaptation of Stranger Things, which led me to believe things were getting a little bit better.

I really wanted them to pull through. Telltale had some of the best art- and narrative-driven games I’ve ever played. There was a lot of talent inside that studio, and I hope they all end up alright.

When you perform a right-click in MacOS via the trackpad — by clicking or tapping with two fingers — there’s a small delay before you see the contextual menu appear. Apparently, to my delight, this lag can be removed by disabling the “Smart zoom” gesture, relieving MacOS from waiting a few milliseconds to see if another two-finger tap/click was on the way, which would indicate you wanted to zoom the current content.

Thankfully, I never use this zoom feature (pinch-to-zoom is more precise anyhow), and I was able to disable the gesture by going to:

System Preferences > Trackpad > Scroll & Zoom

and then unchecking “Smart zoom”. It’s amazing how much faster my secondary click feels now — the contextual menu appears instantly. Sometimes it’s the small things.

Google Inbox, the gesture-driven email experiment that turned your inbox into an actionable list of tasks, is going away at the end of March 2019. I get why they’re shutting it down — Google wants to focus their efforts on Gmail, which recently received a brand new UI — but I’m still disappointed. Inbox made it easy to keep your, uh, inbox tidy because the app grouped related types of messages; allowing you to send an entire category to the archive with a single swipe. I don’t mind Mail on iOS, but Inbox always felt a bit faster for interfacing with Gmail, and Mail probably won’t ever support Google’s unique approach to labels-as-folders.

The Medium Exodus of 2018 continues. This week, it’s a tweet from CTO and co-founder of Basecamp, David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH):

After further review, we’re going to be leaving Medium at some point in the near-to-mid-term future. Thanks for all the fish,@ev! You built a beautiful typewriter, the early community was awesome, and I respect trying something different. Shame about the VC pressures. Adieu!

If you’re not familiar with Signal v. Noise, it’s a well-known “publication about the web” with almost 20 years of history. I’ve been reading Signal v. Noise for over a decade now, and their strong opinions on product, design, and business tend to be succinct and influential in those communities.

I was always a bit surprised that Basecamp — staunchly in support of companies that choose profit over potential growth — would go all-in with a platform like Medium. A VC-funded, zero profit publishing company that restricts your ability to control the design of your content felt like the antithesis to what Signal v. Noise was all about. I’m not sure where they’ll go next (their previous blog was a homegrown Rails app), but if they’re not going back to something in-house I could see them trying out Ghost; the 2.0 release looks slick.

Regardless, this isn’t a great sign for Medium. Ever since they dropped support for custom domains, I don’t see why any new publications would seriously consider moving there. And if you already have a custom domain with Medium, I’d urge you to start looking at alternatives.

I should really just put that in my site’s header.

Executive Editor and co-founder at Polygon, Chris Plante:

Games have changed since we launched Polygon. We’re changing with them. 

We believe that a new strategy, focusing on criticism and curation, will better serve our readers than the serviceable but ultimately limited reviews rubric that, for decades, has functioned as a load-bearing pillar of most game publications.

As part of this evolution, Polygon will no longer score reviews.

Polygon’s updated review strategy is built around two new programs: Recommends (labeling to endorse a particular title) and Essentials (curated lists of the best games available). As Mr. Plante points out, Polygon is following the lead of Kotaku, Waypoint, and Eurogamer; all of which have stepped away from numerical score systems.

This is a good move for Polygon and, I’d argue, any video game review site. When it comes to reviews, 5-star scales are worthless, let alone the 10-point variant sites like Polygon previously used. If it were up to me, I’d make all review sites use a simple thumbs up/down grade and maybe a “neutral” for something not terrible nor worth endorsing. A thumbs up tells me the game is worth playing — a 7.6/10 doesn’t.

Behavioral Biometrics Are a Cookie You Can’t Clear

Stacy Cowley, the New York Times, on how banks and retailers are using your taps, swipes, and other device sensor data to verify you’re you:

The way you press, scroll and type on a phone screen or keyboard can be as unique as your fingerprints or facial features. To fight fraud, a growing number of banks and merchants are tracking visitors’ physical movements as they use websites and apps.

Some use the technology only to weed out automated attacks and suspicious transactions, but others are going significantly further, amassing tens of millions of profiles that can identify customers by how they touch, hold and tap their devices.

The data collection is invisible to those being watched. Using sensors in your phone or code on websites, companies can gather thousands of data points, known as “behavioral biometrics,” to help prove whether a digital user is actually the person she claims to be.

This sort of invisible “continuous authentication” — where my taps and swipes are tracked and checked against how I’ve tapped and swiped in the past — sounds great from a security perspective but not from a privacy one. Metadata can be incredibly revealing, and while I don’t think behavioral biometrics are a bad idea, I dislike how the data would be collected in the background without my knowledge. Couldn’t behavioral biometrics be an additional, opt-in security feature like two-factor authentication? Or is that too weird for most people to think about?

For now, it appears behavioral-tracking companies like BioCatch are focused on banking and retail. But how long until these techniques are applied by the advertising industry to further track and maintain a profile on who you are? If advertisers rely more on a combination of sensor data and how a user behaves on a webpage, then it’s possible that the user themselves become the ultimate cookie — one that’s almost impossible to clear.

To prevent this sort of misuse, our devices should prompt us for permission whenever a website or app tries to read device data that could be revealing. Android and iOS already require permission prompts for certain kinds of user data, like access to your contacts or location. But these permission requests should extend to include data coming from the device itself, whether device orientation, ambient lighting conditions, or battery levels.

Allowing websites and apps to read device data isn’t inherently bad, and as our devices become more powerful we’ll want our software to have access those capabilities. But unfettered visibility into my device and how I’m using it shouldn’t be available without my consent. Any less and I see it as an intentional leaking of private user information.

Nice overview of Liverpool F.C. by Kevin Draper for the New York Times, in which he correctly identifies the club’s primary advantage — its manager:

The birth of the new Liverpool may have been Oct. 8, 2015, the day F.S.G. announced the hiring of [Jürgen] Klopp, the former Borussia Dortmund manager. In less than three years, Klopp has become the exuberant, backslapping and hugging face of the club. His aggressive gegenpressing, or counterpressing, system is the key to Liverpool’s ruthless attack, and it can be a pleasure to watch — provided you’re not supporting the team being subjected to it

Klopp’s enthusiasm during matches is absolutely intoxicating.

Quite the completionist.
Thanks for reading.
More? Go to the archive.