Hearted Youtube comments on Upper Echelon (@UpperEchelon) channel.

  1. 5600
  2. 4800
  3. 3900
  4. 3600
  5. 2900
  6. 2400
  7. 2200
  8. 2100
  9. 2100
  10. 2000
  11. 1900
  12. 1900
  13. 1500
  14. 1400
  15. 1400
  16. 1300
  17. 1300
  18. They targeted gamers. Gamers. We're a group of people who will sit for hours, days, even weeks on end performing some of the hardest, most mentally demanding tasks. Over, and over, and over all for nothing more than a little digital token saying we did. We'll spend most if not all of our free time min maxing the stats of a fictional character all to draw out a single extra point of damage per second. Many of us have made careers out of doing just these things: slogging through the grind, all day, the same quests over and over, hundreds of times to the point where we know evety little detail such that some have attained such gamer nirvana that they can literally play these games blindfolded. Do these people have any idea how many controllers have been smashed, systems over heated, disks and carts destroyed 8n frustration? All to latter be referred to as bragging rights? These people honestly think this is a battle they can win? They take our media? We're already building a new one without them. They take our devs? Gamers aren't shy about throwing their money else where, or even making the games our selves. They think calling us racist, mysoginistic, rape apologists is going to change us? We've been called worse things by 10 year olds with a shitty head set. They picked a fight against a group that's already grown desensitized to their strategies and methods. Who enjoy the battle of attrition they've threatened us with. Who take it as a challange when they tell us we no longer matter. Our obsession with proving we can after being told we can't is so deeply ingrained from years of dealing with big brothers/sisters and friends laughing at how pathetic we used to be that proving you people wrong has become a very real need; a honed reflex. Gamers are competative, hard core, by nature. We love a challange. The worst thing you did in all of this was to challange us. You're not special, you're not original, you're not the first; this is just another boss fight.
    1200
  19. 1200
  20. 1200
  21. 1100
  22. 1100
  23. 1100
  24. 1000
  25. 1000
  26. 1000
  27. 991
  28. The Mary Sue. Ok, so about 15 years(ish) ago, The Mary Sue was basically a blog site written primarily by its founder chick, forget her name. It was getting some word of mouth pushing against things like sexualization of female characters and pointing out things like Wonder Woman's early rope bondage scenes, things like that (which I find to just make comics more interesting and free, honestly, part of the mystique in our pop culture, the fabric of our national psyche). But somebody recommended it in a message board discussion I was having, so I decided to pop over and give it a look. I read every blog post still scrolling on the front page, and it was interesting, but also troublingly vindictive against white males and espoused a brand of feminism I'd never seen, one that was almost puritanical, aggressively anti-sexual, and basically took a repulsive, paranoid view of innocuous things like the way men took notice of her (without really saying or doing anything) while she rode an elevator wearing cosplay and how she felt during the experience, for instance. So I wrote her a letter asking her to reconsider things from an individual perspective. I told her about my personal experience growing up and the kinds of unconscious discrimination I experienced moving around to all these small towns growing up regarding my native features with white skin. I'm 3/16 native, so 18.75%, the rest a mix of English, Irish, Welsh, German, French, etc., and I look a lot like my half mohawk ancestor in the Trail of Tears, but also a lot like my Welsh grandfather involved in the War of The Roses. People that attacked me would often say I "look like a girl" even though I'm a big dude and fully masculine, would talk about my posture or the way I walked, etc. I talked about group dynamics, natural prejudice in homogeneous areas, and sociodynamics related to things like my dad being a minister and always being the new kid everywhere I went. I was attacked at least once a year, ostracized more than once, needled over my looks, my faith, my smarts, followed home with weapons as a teen and had to fight with more than one attacker at a time more than once. The police got involved with that last one, and they even accused me of racism to deflect blame, because hey, white skin. I finished up going to private and then home school. I was tough, but I had to fight physically, get around the system, overcome depression, and generally win my own personal war for survival before I ever even got to college. But her ideology didn't account for any of that. According to her, the patriarchy was oppressing everyone but white males, and anything we suffered was all on our own worthlessness, because everything was wired to give us every advantage. White privilege is a myth, things are a lot more complicated than that, and I made that rational argument to her while asking her to look at people and their situations from an individual and nuanced point of view, with my experience as an example. Her response? She wrote her next blog about how a white man had asked her to consider his point of view, and about how she wouldn't, because no, he had every advantage. It was him (me) that was oppressing her (along with other ethnic minorities, she being a white lady), about how it was presumptuous and smacked of privilege to ask her to consider his story and his obstacles, or anything else he thought, and how he was solely responsible for everything that didn't go just right for him, because he was the advantaged one. She answered my honest outreach with racism, sexism, degradation, and vitriol. So screw The Mary Sue. How the hell do these people get to tell anybody anything about what's right and fair and considerate to anyone? How the hell do they get to ruin our culture? No. Edit: Anyway, I need to forgive her. But don't listen to 'em unless they repent of that ideology. God bless.
    880
  29. 877
  30. 836
  31. 812
  32. 802
  33. 799
  34. 776
  35. 771
  36. 747
  37. 734
  38. 731
  39. 709
  40. 694
  41. 693
  42. 690
  43. 687
  44. 678
  45. 670
  46. 670
  47. 669
  48. 665
  49. 650
  50. 632
  51. 624
  52. Upper Echelon: (Paraphrasing) "Zoey and Mark are polar opposites in nearly every aspect except their online behavior and their audiences behavior." Comments: "OMG DUDE C'MON, GRUMMZ IS NOTHING LIKE ZOEY, SHE "insert something she did that doesn't have anything to do with Kickstarter funds and game development". Lol... sigh GUYS, he only mentioned Zoey Quinn to shine a light on the fact that even though they are opposed and literally polar opposites, they are nearly identical when it comes to defending themselves and what their audiences do in their defense AND HE EVEN goes on to mention how the media defended Zoey and painted her as a "victim and survivor" while claiming she never did anything wrong and now Mark is going through something very similar but objectively much less harmful and self lucrative yet he's being painted as a "grifter, racist, bigot and thief" and the media even ran articles about Mark being a, "dead beat dad that doesn't pay child support".(Completely made up and lacks any evidence to support) and they continued to run this story even after it was proven incorrect. You guys in the comments are so quick to Marks defense that you aren't aware he doesn't need one because UE is proving a point that even though they are opposites, they do have a similar event in their life that they both get criticism for yet one side defends Zoey as if she's a saint and martyr while they simultaneously try to crucify and slander Mark for similar things Zoey has done yet they pretend she didn't. (Pro Tip: Try to watch the entire video, listening and comprehending every word before clicking the comment section.) Edit: typed this on a phone, sorry for any typos and I never look at my replies so don't bother)
    620
  53. 613
  54. 608
  55. 607
  56. 594
  57. 587
  58. 586
  59. 584
  60. 584
  61. 582
  62. 569
  63. 536
  64. 534
  65. 533
  66. 530
  67. 524
  68. 522
  69. 513
  70. 502
  71. 499
  72. 493
  73. 480
  74. 474
  75. 467
  76. 466
  77. 464
  78. 464
  79. 459
  80. 451
  81. 445
  82. 442
  83. 439
  84. 436
  85. 436
  86. 423
  87. 420
  88. 418
  89. 416
  90. 416
  91. 412
  92. 409
  93. 408
  94. 408
  95. 405
  96. 401
  97. 397
  98. 396
  99. 392
  100. 391
  101. 386
  102. 384
  103. 380
  104. 380
  105. 376
  106. 373
  107. 367
  108. 365
  109. 365
  110. 361
  111. @UpperEchelonGamers You, sort of, ask "why" would Bethesda do all of these actions given the negative reaction each brings. Others in the comment section speculate that Bethesda simply needs cash and they need it now. It can't be to please shareholders, which others have speculated, as Bethesda/Zenimax are private companies that are not publicly traded, thus, there are no shareholders to please. Fallout 4 released in 2015 and was a billion dollar game for Bethesda. Since Fallout 4's release, Bethesda published; Wolfenstein II and Prey. We know that Starfield is in development along with more Wolfenstein games. We also know that sales for both Wolfenstein II and Prey were average. This means that there are or have been a total of five games developed or under development by Bethesda, at least, since Fallout 4. Depending on the budget allotted for these games, it very well could be that Bethesda is trying to bolster its operating capital using Fallout 76. I think that it is only part of the answer, however. The entire concept of "games as a service" is that there is a steady stream of revenue for little actual work. This fits perfectly with what we've seen regarding Fallout 76; flipped assets from Skyrim and Fallout 4, overpriced cash shop, lootboxes with a pay-to-win aspect, on top of the initial sales for the game itself. Instead of following the cycle of development/release, I think Bethesda decided to bolster their revenue stream with their own "game as a service" title. But, Bethesda only had one IP that they could put forth for it (Fallout) as Zenimax already runs Elder Scrolls Online, so, we saw Fallout 76. The thought of a steady stream of revenue using Fallout looked to be very lucrative on paper. Fallout 4 sold 12 million copies on day 1 generating over $750 million dollars. Online multi-player pvp games, like Call of Duty, generate as much if not more given cash shops and pay-to-win lootboxes. The trending genre over the past few years have been survival games. Put all that together and you see Fallout 76, or at least, the core concept of Fallout 76 when they did the reveal. I'm sure Todd Howard saw a billion in initial sales alone from the Fallout fans with hundreds of millions in steady revenue each year from the pvp/survival crowd they hoped to attract. What they didn't count on was the 75% loss in initial sales from Fallout fans that refused to buy the game. So they are left with a game that garnered a fraction in sales of Fallout 4 and didn't attract as many pvp/survival players as they hoped. How Bethesda got themselves into this mess is easy to see when we look at it from this angle. They counted on Fallout 76's initial sales numbers being near Fallout 4 numbers. They knew they would lose some Fallout fans being that Fallout 76 was going to be pvp survival, but, they figured those sales numbers would be bolstered by those new pvp/survival fan sales. After the reveal, Bethesda saw the pre-order numbers and this is when they freaked out. They had to make a decision; they could go forward as is, losing 75% of sales numbers, or, they could reverse course as best they could and try to get some of that 75% back. They chose the latter. Pvp was nuked, but, they still had the problem that the core game, itself, was geared around pvp/survival with no real story or quests to speak of for the Fallout fans. Thus, this decision to try and get back that 75% of Fallout fans started the snowball of bad decisions by Bethesda we see today. There is no doubt that they will have to do as Zenimax had to do with ESO; that is, they will have to take a year and revamp the entire core game of Fallout 76 in an effort to boost player count. The problem? They will never recover that 75% of fans they lost and Starfield is going to go under a microscope. Todd Howard has screwed Bethesda for years to come. The only game Bethesda has on the horizon that is guaranteed to sell a huge number of copies is TES:VI. Fans of the Elder Scrolls are going to buy that game regardless of its state at launch. It could be worse than Fallout 76. Fans will still buy it knowing the modders will fix many of the bugs, make it playable, and add mods to it. But, TES:VI is at least six years out if not eight years out. Every other title Bethesda releases in the meantime is going to go under a microscope and, I'm going to bet, have lackluster sales.
    357
  112. 356
  113. 354
  114. 343
  115. 343
  116. 342
  117. 340
  118. 337
  119. 336
  120. 335
  121. 330
  122. 329
  123. 328
  124. 326
  125. 324
  126. 323
  127. 315
  128. So I, personally, disagree with the current version of generative AI being the worst it is going to be. The issue that comes into play is that the rate at which humans can produce content is greatly outmatched by the rate at which AI can produce content. This makes it almost an inevitability that AI content is going to bloat the web as a whole, and eventually, a separate inflection point will occur where there is more AI content than human made content. At face value, this is bad news. But on the contrary, when it's bloated to that point, it begins training on its own products. It receives positive signals that its mistakes are correct as there is more training data that is based on its mistakes, essentially inbreeding these errors until it once again decays in quality. This has already been reported in the neural network Midjourney, which is primarily used for dark fantasy/dark surrealism (which was one of my favorite genres of art, so I have a vendetta against it, I'll attest to) as the genres of art were flooded with its works, replacing most human content there. Once you have an eye for it, you can tell when something is a work of midjourney vs a real human producing it. Styles get stale, seeing only one all the time makes it annoying, which means it has to improve and adapt, or else it gets stale. There is no freezing the weights and expecting the same usage forever, you can't escape needing to continue to train. The same will be the case with deep fakes, it will be an arms race of AI detection vs adaptive AI. This means it will, inevitably, have to continue to train, which means it will train on its own products, which means it will decay in quality. AI, as it exists now, and on the current path of its advancement, will eat its own tail until it devolves. You'll still have the less mentally prepared people falling for it, but it will not get to the point where nobody can tell the difference. There will always be some tool or some people who can detect it. It's incredibly valuable for everyone to train their discernment skills, though, regardless, so I deeply appreciate your work, despite my own rambling.
    314
  129. 311
  130. 304
  131. 303
  132. 302
  133. 300
  134. 294
  135. 293
  136. 290
  137. 289
  138. 288
  139. 286
  140. 286
  141. 285
  142. 283
  143. 282
  144. 279
  145. 276
  146. 274
  147. 271
  148. 2:26 quick correction: you can delete your mods and you will be able to after the collections system has been implemented. If you read the fine print, nexus basically doesn’t want people arbitrarily deleting their mods since it would ruin the collections feature. The feature to delete mods will return in the form of a new file management system that will allow authors even more control over their files. If you want to delete your mods after this goes into effect, you need to contact a nexus moderator and ask. To quote nexus mods themselves: “Some mod authors brought up the necessity of deleting files that are plain broken and thus useless to the end-user. We do think there is merit to the argument that completely broken files should be deleted, and, at the present moment, we’re open to considering deletion requests based on this on a case by case basis. Down the line, however, we are planning to completely revamp mod and file data management into a much more powerful system that will offer authors better integration with other mods/files. In such a system as we envision it, there will be tools to deal with files that are utterly broken. Our goal ultimately is not to prevent deletions of files that are broken, it is to prevent arbitrary deletions eroding the integrity of the database on one hand, and undermining the collections system on the other. When we’re ready to move closer towards this system, we’ll be more than happy to reach out for feedback from mod authors to make sure they get the toolsuite that would be most useful to them. That being said, let us be clear about the fact that we’re not going to bring back support for random file deletions, due to the problems they cause.” They are working on a new system to address the issues you brought up. Source: https://www.nexusmods.com/news/14538
    271
  149. 266
  150. 265
  151. 262
  152. 261
  153. 260
  154. 259
  155. 254
  156. 253
  157. 252
  158. 252
  159. 248
  160. 248
  161. 247
  162. 244
  163. 241
  164. 241
  165. 240
  166. 240
  167. 240
  168. 240
  169. 238
  170. 235
  171. 235
  172. 232
  173. 227
  174. 226
  175. 224
  176. 224
  177. 222
  178. 216
  179. 216
  180. 216
  181. 214
  182. 213
  183. 212
  184. 210
  185. 208
  186. 207
  187. 206
  188. 205
  189. 204
  190. 201
  191. 200
  192. 198
  193. 197
  194. 196
  195. 195
  196. 194
  197. 190
  198. 190
  199. 189
  200. 189
  201. 188
  202. 186
  203. 185
  204. 185
  205. 182
  206. 180
  207. 176
  208. 176
  209. 176
  210. 174
  211. 173
  212. 173
  213. 173
  214. 168
  215. 168
  216. 167
  217. 166
  218. 161
  219. 161
  220. 160
  221. 156
  222. 156
  223. 155
  224. 155
  225. 155
  226. 155
  227. 153
  228. 152
  229. 151
  230. 145
  231. 144
  232. 142
  233. 140
  234. 140
  235. 140
  236. 140
  237. 137
  238. 133
  239. 132
  240. 132
  241. 129
  242. 128
  243. 128
  244. 127
  245. 126
  246. 124
  247. 124
  248. 123
  249. 123
  250. 122
  251. 119
  252. 117
  253. 116
  254. 116
  255. 115
  256. 115
  257. 112
  258. 108
  259. 107
  260. 105
  261. 105
  262. 103
  263. 103
  264. 102
  265. 102
  266. 101
  267. 100
  268. 98
  269. 97
  270. 97
  271. 97
  272. 97
  273. 95
  274. 93
  275. 93
  276. 92
  277. 90
  278. 90
  279. 90
  280. 89
  281. 89
  282. 88
  283. 88
  284. 88
  285. 86
  286. 86
  287. 85
  288. 84
  289. 83
  290. 83
  291. 83
  292. 83
  293. 82
  294. 82
  295. 82
  296. 82
  297. 81
  298. 81
  299. 81
  300. 80
  301. 78
  302. 76
  303. 76
  304. 75
  305. 75
  306. 75
  307. 72
  308. 72
  309. 71
  310. 71
  311. 71
  312. 71
  313. 70
  314. 70
  315. 70
  316. 70
  317. 68
  318. 68
  319. 68
  320. 68
  321. 68
  322. 68
  323. 67
  324. 66
  325. ** EDITED TO INCLUDE RELEVANT LICENSE INFORMATION TO CLEAR CONFUSION, CLICK "READ MORE" TO SEE WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT ** Wait people don't know this? Yeah you buy a license to play the game so long as it's available to download, which can be pulled at any time. This is why I've never understood why digital purchases were on price parity with physical copies. ****EDIT*: I see there's lots of confusion here, so let me CLEAR this up (area of importance is near the bottom of the quote): https://www.playstation.com/en-ca/network/legal/terms-of-service/ And I quote: "Access to Purchased Items. Upon our confirmation of your transaction, you may access the item you ordered through the Account that you used to order the item, according to the applicable Usage Terms or other terms associated with that item. We encourage you to download (if permitted) or access the item immediately after completing your transaction. You bear all risk of loss for accessing the content, including completing the download of any content, maintaining a continuous Internet connection with sufficient speed, ensuring that you have the necessary capabilities to view the content, including content format compatibility, and for any loss of content you have downloaded, including any loss due to a file corruption or hard drive crash. You are solely responsible if you do not choose to **download or access the content before it is removed or your license expires, and for ongoing storage and safekeeping of the content. We are not obligated to provide you with replacement copies for any reason.**" In Addition: "Except as stated in this agreement, all content and software provided through PSN Services are licensed non-exclusively and revocably to you for your personal, private, non-transferable, non-commercial, limited use on a limited number of devices in the country in which your Account is registered. [...] Use of the terms "own," "ownership", "purchase," "sale," "sold," "sell," "rent" or "buy" on or in connection with PSN Services does not mean or imply any transfer of ownership of any content, data or software or any intellectual property rights from SIE LLC, its affiliates or its licensors to any user or third party." The language used, as boring as it is, cannot be any clearer: You do NOT own your digital puchase in any way shape or form, and big daddy Sony can and will and has in the past determined whether your're allowed to download it again. The only thing they can't do, is remotely scrub data off your physical devices drive. So cherish those lost games and fallen properties, lost to in annals of time, or really insane ebay purchases of entire consoles with lost content on it.
    66
  326. 65
  327. 64
  328. 64
  329. 64
  330. 64
  331. 62
  332. 62
  333. 62
  334. 62
  335. 62
  336. 62
  337. 61
  338. 61
  339. 60
  340. 59
  341. 59
  342. 59
  343. 59
  344. 58
  345. 58
  346. 58
  347. 58
  348. 57
  349. 57
  350. 57
  351. 57
  352. 56
  353. 56
  354. 56
  355. 56
  356. 56
  357. 55
  358. 55
  359. 54
  360. 54
  361. 54
  362. 53
  363. 53
  364. 53
  365. 53
  366. 52
  367. 52
  368. 52
  369. 52
  370. 52
  371. 51
  372. 51
  373. 51
  374. 51
  375. 51
  376. 51
  377. 50
  378. 49
  379. 49
  380. 49
  381. 49
  382. 48
  383. 48
  384. 48
  385. 47
  386. 46
  387. 46
  388. 46
  389. 45
  390. 44
  391. 43
  392. 43
  393. 43
  394. 42
  395. 42
  396. 42
  397. 42
  398. 42
  399. 41
  400. 41
  401. 41
  402. 41
  403. 40
  404. 40
  405. 40
  406. 39
  407. 39
  408. 39
  409. 39
  410. 38
  411. 38
  412. 38
  413. 37
  414. 37
  415. 37
  416. 36
  417. 36
  418. 36
  419. 36
  420. 35
  421. 35
  422. 35
  423. 35
  424. 35
  425. 34
  426. 34
  427. 33
  428. 33
  429. 33
  430. 33
  431. 33
  432. 32
  433. 32
  434. 32
  435. 32
  436. 32
  437. 32
  438. 31
  439. 31
  440. 31
  441. 31
  442. 31
  443. 31
  444. 30
  445. 30
  446. 30
  447. 29
  448. As a newcomer to your channel I've been looking forward to this. First came across you at 17:00 (U.K. time) on Friday, and gotta say I was hugely impressed.The way you managed to turn a 6 hour loading screen into an entertaining podcast was genuinely admirable. I was with you all the way from; "C'mon third time's a charm", through organic root beer and Captain Morgans, "another half hour and I'm going to start raging"," are they actually ddosing themselves?", "shall I/shan't I get pizza", until finally, "nope I'm at the end of my rope". What impressed me the most was your desire to maintain objectivity in the face of extreme frustration, and that's what convinced me to sub. Yesterday, I was with you again as I am also on Xbox, and was interested to see to what extent the graphics had been downgraded despite Bioware's promise to the contrary. Everybody knew this was coming right? Prior to yesterday all updates, dev streams and shill videos had been tricked out PC footage only, which I thought allowed EA/Bioware to pull off the neat trick of appearing to be transparent while remaining opaque to their largest (console) player base. Have to say it's not as bad as I feared, but it's clearly been downgraded nonetheless. Anyway, putting that aside, I found your commentary to be objectively fair once more and genuinely informative. However, there was one point where I disagreed with you, and that was when you said that story doesn't matter in a looter-shooter. It's important to note here I'm not saying you're wrong. I am happy to acknowledge that there is a significant player base out there to whom story really doesn't matter. In fact they see any kind of story as a barrier to their progression to end game and min maxing their stats. You only have to sit through a few shill videos and hear them talk about blitzing through content as quickly as possible to realize the truth of this. My point is that for players like me, and the thousands of others like me, story really does matter. It matters a lot. Especially in a Bioware game. You see, I belong to the other significant player base out there who will look at Anthem and think, sure the game play looks fun, sure the customization looks cool, but where's the premise? Where's the story? Where's my reason to purchase this product? And if EA/Bioware fail to engage this player base, it's going to negatively impact their projected sales, making Anthem about as commercially successful as Andromeda. And, to all the players who don't care about story I just have to ask; what have you got to lose from the inclusion of a good premise, well written narrative, great dialogue and truly engaging characters? Surely it can only enhance your experience, not take away from it? So, unless EA/Bioware's marketing strategy starts dropping info bombs regarding story pretty soon, the player base I belong to are going to give Anthem a pass and save their money for something else more engaging and immersive. If that happens, it will be truly sad to see a once respected developer like Bioware go the same way as Visceral. With all that being said, keep up the good work. I'm looking forward to going through your back catalogue.
    29
  449. 29
  450. 29
  451. 29
  452. 28
  453. 28
  454. 28
  455. 28
  456. 28
  457. 28
  458. 28
  459. 27
  460. 27
  461. 27
  462. 27
  463. 27
  464. 27
  465. 27
  466. 26
  467. 26
  468. 26
  469. 26
  470. 26
  471. 26
  472. 26
  473. 26
  474. 25
  475. 25
  476. 25
  477. 25
  478. 25
  479. 24
  480. 24
  481. 24
  482. 24
  483. 24
  484. 24
  485. 23
  486. 23
  487. 23
  488. 23
  489. 23
  490. 23
  491. Nope, a data protection officer doesn't have to be a separate entity. You probably confused that with youth protection officers - a position which is most commonly held by lawyers, and as many small business feel they can't or simply don't want to afford their own lawyer for that purpose alone and they don't have the need to employ a full-time lawyer for other purposes, there are lawyers who specialize in this field and who can be hired to act as a company's youth protection officer even though they have no other relationship with the company in question. With data protection officers the situation is a bit different. While you surely could outsource this position in the very same manner you can outsource anything, it is pretty uncommon to actually do that. The reason is that a data protection officer usually needs at least some understanding of not just the applicable laws but also the kind of data the company handles as well as the underlying processes in order to be of any value to the company. Unless your business is really just a sandbox webshop or something similar, you won't find that knowledge with a lawyer you hire on a per-case basis. There is something special though about data protection officers, and I think this is where the confusion comes from: Although they are usually employed by the company and have a normal contract just like any other employee, they are special as the law grants them the privilege to report to management directly (a data protection officer does not have the authority to implement any changes), plus management/the company is not allowed to make any rules pertaining what and/or how exactly the data protection officer does. For instance, the company can of course set the working hours for the data protection officer, just like they can with any other of their employees, but they can't tell them to turn a blind eye on a particular process or system, or to not evaluate maybe an entire office because people there are still new and don't have a clue about data protection yet or whatever. The YouTuber in question might not be required to have a data protection officer in the first place though as that would require her business operating with customer data which can be tied to individual customers (personalized data) being an integral part of its business processes. That's at least the minimum requirement according to EU GDPR, though member states are free to implement stricter requirements. Oh, and as for the PO box/mail forwarding service: It is of course absolutely okay to have your company's data protection officer be reachable via one - as long as they are actually reachable via said service. If no address is given for the data protection officer, they must be reachable via the company's address. I don't know whether the YouTuber in question states her business address anywhere on her website though - for instance, laws in Germany would require her to do so, but that's a local law -, so maybe this is just an attempt to hide her business address which might very well be her home address from the public. However, the question why she has to have a data protection officer in the first place still remains.
    22
  492. 22
  493. 20
  494. 20
  495. 20
  496. 20
  497. 20
  498. 20
  499. 20
  500. 20
  501. 20
  502. 20
  503. 20
  504. 19
  505. 19
  506. 19
  507. 19
  508. 18
  509. 18
  510. 18
  511. 18
  512. 18
  513. 18
  514. 18
  515. 18
  516. 17
  517. 17
  518. 17
  519. 17
  520. 17
  521. 17
  522. 17
  523. 17
  524. 17
  525. 17
  526. 17
  527. 17
  528. 16
  529. 16
  530. 16
  531. 16
  532. 16
  533. 16
  534. 15
  535. 15
  536. 15
  537. 15
  538. 15
  539. 15
  540. 15
  541. 14
  542. 14
  543. 14
  544. 14
  545. 14
  546. 14
  547. 14
  548. 14
  549. 14
  550. 14
  551. 14
  552. 14
  553. 14
  554. 13
  555. 13
  556. 13
  557. 13
  558. 13
  559. 13
  560. 13
  561. 13
  562. 13
  563. 12
  564. 12
  565. 12
  566. 12
  567. 12
  568. 12
  569. 12
  570. 12
  571. NGL pretty disappointed you pretty much glossed over what happened with drone and didn't cover what happened in its discord (though TBF I'm not sure if you're even aware of what happened there). It was a LOT worse than you made it sound - it was not just a simple acquisition. It wasn't just that people where mad as hell (myself included) in the discord but that E2 weaponized its community to preform a hostile takeover of the community - it's not that they weren't able to find a middle ground between us but rather wanted us out. Period. In fact I'd say they where shocked we where still around NGL. It was only until we made it very clear that we where not going to let this go lying down that they then tried to find a middle ground - saying they'll try to make a separate version without any of the NFT & crypto shit we didn't ask for. Utterly ignoring the fact that the majority of us wanted nothing to do with E2 at all and that even if there was a separate version it would still get effected by E2 regardless , utterly defeating the entire point of the second version to begin with. They didn't want to have any of drones community survive the death of the game , why do you think the NDA shut the devs out from talking to us at all instead of just stopping them from talking about E2? I don't see how that NDA was not one without the malicious intent to cull the drone community, so that when the E2 acquisition fully completed; the community would have no backlash - because there would be no one there to cause backlash which obviously back fired tremendously.
    11
  572. 11
  573. 11
  574. 11
  575. 11
  576. 11
  577. 11
  578. 11
  579. 11
  580. 11
  581. 11
  582. 11
  583. 11
  584. 11
  585. 10
  586. 10
  587. 10
  588. 10
  589. 10
  590. 10
  591. 10
  592. 10
  593. 10
  594. 10
  595. 10
  596. 10
  597. 10
  598. 10
  599. 10
  600. 10
  601. 9
  602. 9
  603. 9
  604. 9
  605. 9
  606. 9
  607. 9
  608. 9
  609. 9
  610. 9
  611. 9
  612. 9
  613. 9
  614. 9
  615. 9
  616. 9
  617. 9
  618. 9
  619. 8
  620. 8
  621. 8
  622. 8
  623. 8
  624. 8
  625. 8
  626. 8
  627. 8
  628. 8
  629. 8
  630. 8
  631. 8
  632. 8
  633. 8
  634. 8
  635. 7
  636. 7
  637. 7
  638. 7
  639. 7
  640. 7
  641. 7
  642. 7
  643. 7
  644. 7
  645. 7
  646. 7
  647. 7
  648. 7
  649. 7
  650. 7
  651. 7
  652. 7
  653. 7
  654. 7
  655. 7
  656. 7
  657. 7
  658. 7
  659. 7
  660. 7
  661. 7
  662. 7
  663. 7
  664. 6
  665. 6
  666. 6
  667. 6
  668. 6
  669. 6
  670. 6
  671. 6
  672. 6
  673. 6
  674. 6
  675. 6
  676. 6
  677. 6
  678. 6
  679. 6
  680. 6
  681. 6
  682. 6
  683. 6
  684. 6
  685. 6
  686. 6
  687. 6
  688. 6
  689. 6
  690. 6
  691. 6
  692. 6
  693. 6
  694. 6
  695. 6
  696. 5
  697. 5
  698. 5
  699. 5
  700. 5
  701. 5
  702. 5
  703. 5
  704. 5
  705. You had me up until the point where you insinuated that any dissent in the comments section would be "screeching". You're making it seem like about your case couldnt possibly be wrong because it's well articulated. That is not necessarily true. Now, preface...I am quite progressive leaning. I, however am also un-apologetically masculine. Most of my friends and family are the same. Most of the women I know aren't hysterically feminist, as I like to call it, a few like my psychotic ex are part of the fringe you're talking about. But I do not believe that this is the majority of feminists. But, to your main point, toxic masculinity is still a real thing. It refers to the state of mind that lead to problematic behaviors. But you ARE correct that it is getting mislabeled, a lot. Most situations that arise now are something that I refer to as "arbitrary masculinity" where it's not harmful it's just...dumb. Things where you're labeled as not a man if you partake, or in some cases don't partake. FOR INSTANCE, I get bodywash that smells like shit that actually exists like vanilla and shea butter etc. That could be seen as feminine to some men. But why? Why is having this scent in your soap seen as manly but THAT scent seen as girly? Is arbitrary masculinity annoying, sure. But I agree that the ferocity being put into fighting it is pretty misplaced. There are nuances to this subject that you're not allowing for. FYI: I subbed to your channel strictly in support after the hit piece came out on gaming youtubers. Not all of us progressives are spineless pearl clutchers ;)
    5
  706. 5
  707. 5
  708. 5
  709. 5
  710. 5
  711. 5
  712. 5
  713. 5
  714. 5
  715. 5
  716. 5
  717. 5
  718. 5
  719. 5
  720. 5
  721. 5
  722. 5
  723. 5
  724. 5
  725. 5
  726. 5
  727. 5
  728. 5
  729. 5
  730. 5
  731. 5
  732. 5
  733. 5
  734. 5
  735. 5
  736. 5
  737. 5
  738. 5
  739. 5
  740. 5
  741. 5
  742. 5
  743. 5
  744. 5
  745. 5
  746. 5
  747. 5
  748. 4
  749. 4
  750. 4
  751. 4
  752. 4
  753. 4
  754. 4
  755. 4
  756. 4
  757. 4
  758. 4
  759. 4
  760. 4
  761. 4
  762. 4
  763. 4
  764. 4
  765. 4
  766. 4
  767. 4
  768. 4
  769. 4
  770. 4
  771. 4
  772. 4
  773. 4
  774. 4
  775. 4
  776. 4
  777. 4
  778. 4
  779. 4
  780. 4
  781. 4
  782. 4
  783. 3
  784. 3
  785. 3
  786. 3
  787. 3
  788. 3
  789. 3
  790. 3
  791. 3
  792. 3
  793. 3
  794. 3
  795. 3
  796. 3
  797. 3
  798. 3
  799. 3
  800. 3
  801. 3
  802. 3
  803. 3
  804. 3
  805. 3
  806. 3
  807. 3
  808. 3
  809. 3
  810. 3
  811. 3
  812. 3
  813. 3
  814. 3
  815. 3
  816. 3
  817. 3
  818. 3
  819. 3
  820. 3
  821. 3
  822. 3
  823. 3
  824. 3
  825. 3
  826. 3
  827. 3
  828. 3
  829. 3
  830. 3
  831. 3
  832. 3
  833. 3
  834. 3
  835. 3
  836. 3
  837. 3
  838. 3
  839. 3
  840. 3
  841. 3
  842. 3
  843. 3
  844. 3
  845. 2
  846. 2
  847. 2
  848. 2
  849. 2
  850. 2
  851. 2
  852. 2
  853. 2
  854. 2
  855. 2
  856. 2
  857. 2
  858. 2
  859. 2
  860. 2
  861. 2
  862. 2
  863. 2
  864. 2
  865. 2
  866. 2
  867. 2
  868. 2
  869. 2
  870. 2
  871. 2
  872. 2
  873. 2
  874. 2
  875. 2
  876. 2
  877. 2
  878. 2
  879. 2
  880. 2
  881. 2
  882. 2
  883. 2
  884. 2
  885. 2
  886. 2
  887. My thoughts watching through: (this ballooned out far longer than I had intended) Open-source is a good thing but there are arguments to be made in regards to blindly trusting software just because it's open-source. I know that's not what's going on with this list, but it is something to note. And before I continue, I would like to point out that I'm not saying open-source is bad by any means. However, just because something is open-source doesn't mean it's inherently more secure. It's only the popular (Chromium, Firefox, RetroArch, or other such million+ user software) or core/security projects (OpenSSL, WireGuard, KeePass, etc) that get the biggest benefit of hundreds of thousands of pairs of eyes looking over every change made and the code in general looking for and reporting or fixing issues. And stuff still gets missed. Smaller projects don't have that benefit. Not inherently less secure, but also not having the same benefits. Chrome's base (Chromium) is also open-source. It's what current versions of Edge and Opera are both built on top of as well (with modifications, of course), and can be used directly instead of Chrome itself if you want a non-Google-branded version of the browser. KeePassXC is a great choice with a very good browser extension that can let you save credentials (securely) into KeePassXC from within the browser directly (can make migrating to it from a browser's own password store easier). There's also KeePassDX on Android which is also open source and uses the same database. That way, if you do for whatever reason need to log into something from your phone.. there you go. The only downside is that because it's not cloud-based (which is a good thing), any changes made on one device don't automatically get synced to others. For that, I would recommend Syncthing (open-source, secure personal cloud, where all of the nodes are run by you on your own machines - no remote cloud) and setting up a share with that to automatically sync such changes. Routers are a difficult thing due to what you may need/want from the actual wifi portion of it as not all wifi6 routers are created equal. The router I use personally is an ASUS RT-AX88U running Asuswrt-Merlin (fork of ASUS's own open-source Asuswrt firmware). Main reason for this one specifically is because of its 1.8ghz quad core CPU and 4x4 MIMO since I use Entware with it for better NAS-ish and media server support (and a Syncthing client for easy back ups). It also has support for MAC spoofing (if your ISP setup can work with that - some fiber solutions cannot due to their FMC having a small whitelist of allowed MACs. You can run into this problem and have to call your ISP if you ever need to switch to a new router as it may refuse to acknowledge the new router is even connected) as well as having built-in support for running one or more (or any combination of) WireGuard, OpenVPN, IPSec, and PPTP VPN servers locally to allow you to tunnel back into your home connection remotely (as well as optionally access LAN), as well as all of those options as one or more (even multiple) clients pointing to other VPN server solutions to tunnel all out-bound traffic with rules for what gets tunneled to where. It also supports TOR but I have no experience with using it on this router so I don't know if it's purely an on/off toggle or configurable as described.
    2
  888. 2
  889. 2
  890. 2
  891. 2
  892. 2
  893. 2
  894. 2
  895. 2
  896. 2
  897. 2
  898. 2
  899. 2
  900. 2
  901. 2
  902. 2
  903. 2
  904. 2
  905. 2
  906. 2
  907. 2
  908. 2
  909. 2
  910. 2
  911. 2
  912. 2
  913. 2
  914. 2
  915. 2
  916. 2
  917. 2
  918. 2
  919. 2
  920. 2
  921. 2
  922. 2
  923. 2
  924. 2
  925. 2
  926.  @UpperEchelon  If anyone claims a neural network to not have extreme bias, they either never worked on one or are lying to you. The training dataset is not stored within it, in any real form. If you were to use just the base model without any context or adding randomness, it would always generate the exact same response to any prompt. However, for ChatGPT, there are a few other bits than just the base model: it can apply some randomness such as choosing the second or third most likely letter and going with that. It also has, an emulated "short term memory" of sorts, where previous inputs are treated with greater importance than they would be if just added to the model training set. This is what makes it able to seem conversational. An interesting thing this lets you do is tell it things are true and it will go with it. You could tell it that true means false and going forward, it would likely invert the meaning of true in future responses. You can also see the limitations in reasoning by the fact it cannot do math pretty much at all beyond extremely basic one digit arithmetic reliably, but it will be very confident that it can. You can tell it that it is wrong, it will likely agree with you, apologize and generate a new, wrong answer. It's actually not currently possible to have a person tailor responses in a narrow focus output by a neural network bigger than a few dozen parameters, as the way the information is stored is both extremely opaque to humans and the meaning of any given set of parameters is extremely non-trivial or well isolated. If you could reliably hand tailor a large neural network in any significant way, you'd be a very famous person. As for why it ignores data it was trained with: training data isn't stored directly. There are plenty of verifiably false pieces of information it was trained with, but with reinforcement learning, the most commonly repeated things gain more influence on the parameters the more they are repeated and less repeated ones are more or less "forgotten". You actually don't want a network to "memorize" so to speak, many parts of its training dataset. This leads to a phenomenon called overtraining, and it leads to a decrease in the ability to generalize from what was in the training data. There's also just the effect of entropy effectively. Saying something in a prompt before, even if it is unrelated entirely to what you ask next, can still influence the results in various unexpected ways. All the data within the language model is mixed up with each other. One of the most pointed out flaws of ChatGPT is that it generally produces responses that sound authoritative and correct, even if they aren't. It also tends to say things in an appeasing way. Remembering it is trained on lots and lots of words by people, when people say something wrong, how often do they deflect and minimize vs say "I'm wrong, you're right that was a bad mistake". Things like that all go into it. The "goal" as much as adding and multiplying a lot of numbers can have one, is to respond in a way to look like what a human would respond with, not to be factually correct. GPT-3 and ChatGPT were largely unsupervised learners, meaning the amount of human tailoring and labeling of the training dataset and manually evaluating the output are minimized compared to supervised learners, which are still probably the most common outside of generative models. The result and prompt filtering, where it says it can't answer something wholly or partially, I can't comment too much on as it is as far as I know mostly proprietary. Based on my experience with using it, I would say it's likely either outputting values on some parameters regarding various potential flags, so saying something like "this has a 0.6932 similarity to being about politics", or a second neural network is taking the prompt and ChatGPT's response as input, and creating those parameters. The filter then triggers if certain ones of those are alone or in combination above a threshold, and it generates a different response to use instead saying something like it can't do it. This is vulnerable to prompt injection and other techniques to fool the filter, though it has been getting better at evading them as it is updated. For fun, I basically did a coding interview with it as I would with a human candidate, including programming exercises. It can generate solutions to all of the questions, explain them, change things about them, and say how it is supposed to work, while also often containing errors or generating different output than what it says it would generate. I'd recommend reading this paper: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Paper.pdf. It was penned by many of the people who worked on GPT-3, a variant of which backs much of what ChatGPT does. While it's not about ChatGPT and doesn't get into all of these questions, it's a relatively easy read as far as academic papers go and it goes into information about some of its details as well as analysis of some of its limitations. Anyway, that's way too long already. Cheers, and if you have further questions I can answer to my knowledge.
    2
  927. 2
  928. 2
  929. 2
  930. 2
  931. 2
  932. 2
  933. 2
  934. 2
  935. 2
  936. 2
  937. 2
  938. 2
  939. 2
  940. 2
  941. 2
  942. 2
  943. 2
  944. 2
  945. 2
  946. 2
  947. 2
  948. 2
  949. 2
  950. 2
  951. UEG, I know you'll probably either not see this comment or possibly consider it "mouth-breather backlash," but I feel like it's important to write this out just by the very off-chance you see it and take it to heart. I've only recently started watching your content for the last few months but during the last few weeks I've begun to notice an increasing trend of you taking issue with people who respond to your videos. Like just here you spent about 1/5 of the video's length talking about just that (and I'm fairly certain it's what also led to the subsequent like/dislike ratio), and in the past you've taken umbrage with similar topics like in your "Why Criticism is Important" video and in your Doom Eternal review. On the conceptual level I honestly agree with you when you say that reviewers shouldn't just parrot the most popular opinion and that you shouldn't let mob rule dictate what you do on the platform. You keep saying you're "not gonna let the mouth-breathers or angry fanboys force you to do what they want" but the issue I ultimately have with this is I almost never see these types of people commenting on your videos. Like the harshest criticisms I hear about you strangely enough come from comments on videos other content creators made about you. Every time I look through the comment sections on your videos I see people being mostly civil with you, while maybe having a slight jab or so at your expense depending on what the topic is, but not anything that sounds as harsh as you make it out to be. Now to be fair I'm not you so I don't know what you specifically see, maybe you're getting inundated with death threats from Doom Eternal fans or something. However, I think it's a pretty safe assumption to say that these people probably account to 1-5% of all people who comment on your videos. Due to this vast minority gap from my perspective you talking like this makes it sound more like you're making some sort of strawman argument that you can use to deflect any legitimate criticism of your videos as simply "fanboys being fanboys" (which I don't think you're actually trying to do, it just comes off that way to me as an average viewer). I really feel like you got to stop acting like this. If people really are acting like this towards you, then you should simply ignore them. No mention of them, no video segments about them, no pinned comments about them, just answer them with absolute silence. If they really are such a small vocal minority then why are you wasting time personally addressing them? Doing this stuff sort of signifies that their actions are getting under your skin and will only increase the likelihood of them doing this in the future. As well, the fact that these types of people are in such a small minority makes it feel more like these arguments are pointed at the average fan who'll then think you're calling them toxic fanboys and mouth-breathing incels just for simply saying you were wrong about a topic, which will only lead to further false fan perception of you. I'm not gonna say what you definitively got to do to help your channel as it's your channel, but I just think you'll see less fan hostility if you try to stop addressing these problematic elements so much. At the end of the day they just shouldn't even register on your radar, let alone warrant actual responses.
    2
  952. 2
  953. 2
  954. 2
  955. 2
  956. 2
  957. 2
  958. 2
  959. 2
  960. 2
  961. 2
  962. 2
  963. 2
  964. 2
  965. 2
  966. 2
  967. 2
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971. 1
  972. 1
  973. 1
  974. 1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979. 1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984. 1
  985. Chris, You have the best gamer content I've been in touch with for the past five years or more. First of all, let me congratulate you on creating unique content of tremendous value to the player community around the world. And I say the whole world on purpose, since I am Brazilian (resident in Brazil) and I really admire your channel. I watch daily and I will explain why I find its content unique, without leaving empty words hovering in the air. 1 - You have an unusual capacity for numerical analysis. You’re able to confront numbers in an impressive way, analyze large-scale data and explain the reality of the gaming world using graphs, financial records, unit of time and contextualization. And, most importantly, by clearly and simply stating your ideas. You've done this many times: when you analyzed the super bonus given to executives when, in an antagonistic way, their companies were mass-firing creative and competent workers; when you explained about the amount of content purposely removed from games, to be transformed into DLC's or microtransactions. Following this reasoning, I disagree that you are a pessimist. If it were possible to ask a businessman, an investor, and a consumer in 1929 what their views on the economy were, they would all have very negative views of the future, not only that year, but also for the next 25 years. You're not a pessimist, you're an analyst watching the gaming industry at a foggy time and doing your best to keep the future from being even more disastrous. You create deep, technical and true content, following a very ethical, excellent quality and pro-consumer standard. 2 - You hold your opinions in a middle ground, matched by common sense and grounded in data and facts, without getting carried away by the fiery passions of any political spectrum. You do not get carried away by group hysteria – promoted on the one hand - nor by the idea that games make people violent - promoted by the other side. On top of all this, you're honest about the channel support being optional, what products you sell, and even what you buy with your money ... beer and snacks. hahahahaha You do not shy away from difficult issues such as politics in gaming and the consequent current polarization. You do not avoid matters that are hard or that nobody wants to talk about. You say and show what needs to be said and shown. 3 - Your job is harder than it should be. It is notorious that you suffer retaliation from groups and corporations for your critical stance. It is noticeable that your channel does not grow even faster because malicious journalists make fraudulent reports about your content, companies in the gaming industry put pressure on you and the platform itself censors or hampers your life frequently. So you do a terrific job, under harsher and more hostile conditions than other content producers. As if that were not enough, with your honesty, you refuse to sell your soul and prostitute your work for sponsorship, advantages or popularity. I will open a small convenience store soon, and if it serves as an incentive, I intend to use your example of honesty to conduct business and use lessons from how bad practices hurt customers and how terrible it is for business and for life. Congratulations again and best wishes for success! You certainly deserve it!
    1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989. 1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997. 1
  998. 1
  999. 1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. 1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011. 1
  1012. 1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. 1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1