No, I'm pretty sure it's literally fog, some kind of aerosoled mineral oil.
Here is an example: https://imgur.com/a/gdemKM3. Notice the hazy background. The still is from this video [1] at 00:22, coincidentally also a good video about cinematic realism.
Here [2] is a video about lighting that shows adding haze.
Some cinematographers certainly use blooming filters, too. I noticed that Spielberg had a period with tons of bloom, though I don't know if those were filters or just a certain kind of lens. Indiana Jones 4 had absolutely awful photography. Bridge of Spies is also a good example, lots of blooming, lots of hazy indoor rooms.
Bending Spoons has taken at least one of the apps I’ve used and stuffed them full of subscription models in a pretty blatant attempt to wring as much money out of the existing user base before the app becomes obsolete.
It's quite likely that the app was bleeding money before. Whether they're wringing money or being responsible with their finances I can't tell, but consider that the alternative could have been no app at all.
Browsers often present warning screens when visiting sites that aren’t HTTPS, which effectively blocks the site for any users unwilling to or unaware of being able to "proceed with caution."
Before I used GitHub and got used to its interface I felt that the majority of repositories used as public-facing websites were the most confusing way to get releases. Why is the source code that seems to need some sort of tool or program to use sitting next to the installation program? Do I need all that extra stuff or can I just use the exe/app? Why is there not a page with a “download here” button that’s as plain and simple as other closed-source programs?
Most people from the unix world use repos (the correct model for software curation basically). When you go for the sources, it's mostly for fringe stuff or library.
It still has plenty of consistency errors and issues for the devs. But even if they fix all the bugs, I still think the UI changes are regressive: now things are buried in even more icons; the menus warp, change color, and move in distracting ways; and text on button and menus have never been harder to read.
I cancelled my subscription about the same time. The lack of an endorsement is best seen in the context of their choice of headlines and otherwise soft coverage of Trump’s increasingly dictatorial behavior. Taken out of context, it might seem innocuous and perhaps even admirable that no candidate was endorsed, but it’s in the comparison of being overly uncritical of Trump and then not advocating for Harris that gave all those subscribers a reason to cancel.
Either actual writers who care about typography, or actual writers who have had their writings edited by a real editor. Or even anyone just curious enough about writing that they picked up a manual of style.
i'm a frequent em-dash user. it's great for little appositive clauses because it can make the sentence feel less cluttered than commas.
but i have no idea how to type an em-dash. you just put in a double-dash/hyphen (i.e. "--") and any modern word processors will know to convert it to an em-dash for you.
I suspect that lots of writers who use this trick are getting unfairly slammed with "omg, youre an AI! no human knows how to type that character!"
You're conveniently replying to the weakest point of the parent comment. They listed a several more reasons, and when taken together, the article reeks of LLM generated content.
Of course, they certainly do. But this article is really something else! I don't care if it's written by AI or not, but it has a rhetorical style that relies much more on rhythm than on connecting the conceptual dots. Like a TED talk or a revivalist preacher.
It doesn't prove anything but it's a highly suggestive signature. I would hazard a guess that it would be rare for most writers to use an em dash every other sentence.
Isn’t the point of labeling something as a “trauma” to be a signifier for the moment or behavior that affected you greatly and not something that meets an arbitrary level of awfulness, especially by way of comparison? Your father lost a brother, which is definitely certainly traumatic, but my grandfather lost a son. Does that equate to a greater trauma, therefore nullifying your father’s loss? I would say no! Comparing traumas means in my mind that nobody can ever heal because someone else will always have experienced something that was in some way worse.
Not all bad things are trauma. According to the APA: “Any disturbing experience that results in significant fear, helplessness, dissociation, confusion, or other disruptive feelings intense enough to have a long-lasting negative effect on a person’s attitudes, behavior, and other aspects of functioning. Traumatic events include those caused by human behavior (e.g., rape, war, industrial accidents) as well as by nature (e.g., earthquakes) and often challenge an individual’s view of the world as a just, safe, and predictable place. Any serious physical injury, such as a widespread burn or a blow to the head.”
It’s not useful to compare trauma, but not all negative things that happen are trauma.
And perhaps more importantly, not all trauma causes PTSD, which is a defined set of symptoms later in life.
