kae

Global owns the airing rights to SNL in Canada.

I think you may be confused as to who you're responding to. I'm reading some outrage in your response that is directed towards others and their statements, nothing that I've written or believe.

There's no argument to be made. A (good) translator into another language with take into account the intent of the original language and translate it into a comparative version. That can mean changing stories, or idioms that no longer land in the new language.

I'm not the person who made any claim about reading speeds, and I would disagree wholeheartedly with that baseless statement.

Translation isn't a 1 to 1 process. Every language has difference, idioms, etc. My understanding is that sign language is no different.

The translator makes choices to convey meaning, as well as the literal sense.

Would you rather watch content in your native language, or subtitled? If you read translated content, it's fine. But it's not the same as hearing something performed for you. Might be hard to grasp if your language is largely auditory and written, rather than visual and emotive.

Just because sign language is a visual language, does not mean reading is an equivalent. There is a ton of nuance and feeling that goes into communicating through sign language that is not possible through text alone.

Beyond the communication piece, there is respect of an individual who natively speaks a language, and the importance of keeping the language alive.

Oh yes -- I have experience with plenty of mental health calls. Just because it's policy doesn't mean it gets followed.

It's also a general policy that a domestic violence call will always receive a visit. Even if there is a call to cancel it. The risk is too high of an abusers influence for the police to not visit and clear the scene.

So it's good the SIU is looking into what happened here.

I keep seeing "Monopoly" repeated, but I'm having a hard time understanding the logic.

They haven't bought competitors. They don't do anything to hinder others progress in this market, sometime to the detriment of their customers (see: Steam launches another launcher, to launch the game). They haven't openly shown anything anti-competitive, in fact they have stuck to their guns (30% cut) when others have attempted to compete.

What they have done is cultivate the best platform that continues to evolve, add features, and maintain stability. Consumers continue to choose to use Steam overwhelmingly, but outside of Valve's own games, there is no threat of exclusivity or punishment.

It's the opposite of monopolistic behavior. Any company is free to compete, build their own platform, and offer software. It's expensive, and tricky to get right, but nothing is stopping them, Valve included.

Someone give this writer a raise for not using AI to describe a new algorithm.

I've been eyeing Spider-Man Remastered for awhile, but never pulled the trigger due to price and the amount of time I have. I'd love to explore that world though!

Thanks so much for doing this.

Beyond a few news articles in there, that actually looks surprisingly balanced.

In my experience it's the inbox/YouTube where it really gets into it. Subscribing to some of these "alternative news" sources brings a deluge of patently false information with dangerous spin to it.

I'd imagine it's scant on details because it's still a theory. The next phase of the competition is funds to build a proof of concept.