This all sounds extremely familiar. Owning the libs as a show for their base of support back home.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65789916

Apparently it was a story told by an Air Force colonel at an aeronautics conference, who later retracted it.

It's probably not 100% necessary; even Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart (which was designed to use the PS5's fast loading speeds to switch between worlds on the fly, and supports the latest DirectStorage implementation on PC) can be played off a hard drive, tests have shown. But any PC recent enough to play Starfield on really should have an SSD.

A problem with finding a counterexample might be that any widespread desire for something that doesn't exist could make people think it exists, so any possible example seems likely to be disputed. There's a reason people are far more likely to believe in heaven than hell. People believe in what they want to believe in, and that desire isn't proof of anything but a construct in their brain that they think represents something real.

That said, I hope someone comes up with an example, because I've seen this type of rhetoric before (C.S. Lewis had a version of it), and while the logical problems with it are obvious, picking it apart would take a verbose argument that the kinds of people who like these kinds of fortune-cookie apologetics would have no problem tuning out. A quick example would be very convenient.

Well, Nvidia isn't directly involved here at all, they've only commented on the issue once (to say that they don't block other companies' upscaling). The objections tend to come from users, the majority of whom have Nvidia cards and want to use what is widely considered the superior upscaling technology.

The article only has one line about this, noting that what platform this interview would take place on is unclear. I just checked and it looks like he's continued to do a show on Twitter despite Fox News sending him a cease-and-desist letter, so presumably it would be there.

The term ‘AI’ (Artificial Intelligence) refers to computer systems that can perform tasks that would typically require human intelligence,

That's everything computers do, though, isn't it? Pocket calculators would have fit this definition of AI in the 1970s. In the '60s, "computer" was a human job title.

Returnal (PC) - Still playing the Tower of Sisyphus even though I beat the game. This is the most impressed I've been with a Playstation "exclusive" since the PS2, it's so good. I bet a lot of people give up on it pretty quick because of the difficulty, but I find it's less difficult than a Souls game once you get a handle on it.

Horizon Zero Dawn (PC) - I kinda want to get to the part where they explain the robot animals (Dr. Eggman?), but the half-assed combat and boring open world are making me not want to bother.

20XX (PC)- It's fun, but it's also giving me a new appreciation for how well-designed the Mega Man games were. You're not supposed to be hitting your head on the bottoms of platforms in games like this, lmao.

Yeah, most of the answers here seem to miss that part. The LMG lab tech also called out Hardware Unboxed, who responded via Twitter, got flamed by Linus's fans, and that was the end of it. But it sounds like Gamers Nexus was already sick of LMG's shit and that clip was the last straw.

(if it really is one).

I mean, I'm not a journalist, I've just been reading them for decades. It's a thing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/

No story is fair if it covers individuals or organizations that have not been given the opportunity to address assertions or claims about them made by others. Fairness includes diligently seeking comment and taking that comment genuinely into account.

Just as an example that came up in a quick web search--the Washington Post is a major US newspaper and this is its stated policy. Seeking comment from story subjects is an important practice in journalism, and if you consider yourself a journalist and don't do it in a given case, you should probably have a good reason. This is why Steve felt the need to explain himself on that point.

It's a customary practice, and I think it's a good one because it makes the story less one-sided and can diminish the appearance of it being a hit piece if it's negative. Bottom line, it's natural to want to know what the person the story is about thinks of it and what their perspective is. Obviously not all journalists seek a comment from every subject, but if they do, they often mention that they asked for a comment even if they weren't able to get one, because people want to know that they at least tried.

Understandable, but I think many people (including me) are fine with a little drama every once in a while as long as it's warranted and doesn't damage the substance of the content. Unnecessary drama can certainly be a problem, but unnecessarily making dramatic things boring is not necessarily the solution.