Zagorath

That sounds kinda similar to how AoE4 does it, albeit with fewer of the more complex guard rails.

The game only displays your "rating", which resets each season and is used to place you into a certain league. You have two ratings: 1v1 and Team Game. There's slight upward pressure so if you keep playing you should on average climb. At the end of the season you get some basic cosmetic rewards (profile pictures etc.) based on the highest Ranking achieved throughout the season.

The game also keeps a hidden MMR/Elo. That does not reset each season and is the tool actually used by the matchmaking system to decide who you will be playing against. It's a true Elo system, or possibly an Elo-like system such as Glicko. The game keeps track of separate MMR for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4.

While Elo (and side note: it's a person's name, not an acronym) isn't perfect and systems like Glicko-2 are better even for 1v1s, is there a better system than Elo that could be used to rate players in team games? Especially if there's a mix of pre-made teams and random teams thrown together by matchmaking?

Edit: extra bonus if it can be applicable in games that have both 1v1 and team game components where there might be a desire for some form of bleed between the two. (e.g. AoE2 where your starting Elo in one of them is based on your Elo in the other, if you've played a lot of one type of game before trying the other.)

I've only skimmed it, I'll admit, but all I saw was that it said there were 4 attempts. I didn't see what they were, apart from the 1 I already knew of which was mentioned (the 2021 instance).

Wait, 4 attempts? I think I only heard about 1.

Relevant username, too

Isn't it just a small amount of data? If the picture is small enough you could put it directly on the blockchain.

Dunno why you would though. It's very limiting for no particular gain.

It's been a while, but I believe this video was where I heard it. From memory (I'm out right now and can't rewatch to verify) it was specifically the per-kilometre carbon emissions, not taking into account manufacturing costs.

Obviously there's some fuziness depending on your diet and the power source used for charging. A vegan who would be charging in a coal-powered grid is going to look better, relatively speaking, for an analogue bike than someone who eats multiple kilos of red meat every week who has solar panels.

If you're Australian, Bali.

The lowest emission vehicle you can own is an electric bike.*

Will cost 1–4k and way less than $750 annually in maintenance. Can get a road-only one or one capable of going off-road. Does not require insurance or licensing. Can't legally drink and ride, but you're very unlikely to get caught if you do, and unlike drink driving the risk is overwhelmingly only to yourself.

Keeps you fit and healthy by being active in your daily life.

* yes, lower even than an analogue bike, because the electric motor is more carbon efficient than human muscle power which requires eating more.

I don't even think that's remotely true.

I've seen two cases that actually directly impacted my ability to use Firefox. I can only presume there are many more. Those being supporting the column-span CSS property (available since 2010 in other browsers with vendor prefix, and early 2016 without, while being late 2019 for FF) and supporting iPad OS's multi-window functionality (introduced mid 2019, Firefox has had it for just a handful of months now). I have first hand experience telling me very directly that this is true.

There's also been a lot of talk about Firefox's lack of support for PWAs. I've not experienced that myself to be able to comment more than to say I've noted others have complaints.

The point is that with open source you can effectively leech off of Google for now, while still retaining the flexibility to nope out and do your own thing at any point you decide.

Considering just how severely behind they are already (as I mentioned in my other comment, they're often 3–5 years behind other browsers in implementing new web standards or operating system features), I see anything they can do to reduce how much they need to maintain independently as a good thing. In an ideal world where they had all the funding and development power they could want I might say sticking with the completely independent Firefox would be great. But that just isn't where they're at today.

They wouldn't be at the mercy of anything. That's...how open source works. If it changes in a way that breaks things for you, don't pull that change. At that point, if the change is drastic enough to require it, you can turn that soft fork into a hard fork and hope that Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera, etc. join you; something that would significantly hamper Google's ability to maintain their dominance of the browser engine market. That's a choice that they simply don't have today when being based on Firefox and Gecko means using an inferior browser platform.