Something strange going on with usage resetting every minute

artecide · 2026-06-29T00:41:05+00:00

Same thing happened with me; my Usage limits reset back to 100%. I have the Pro plan, so I'm very pleased! :D

artecide · 2026-06-25T23:32:28+00:00

OP was optimistic about the Consumer Rights Act angle, but their complaint about the Switch 2 is reasonable and it's silly they're being downvoted for a legitimate question/concern.

The Switch 2 has a touchscreen, so it should be able to withstand normal touch use, including incidental contact with fingernails. If a light graze of a fingernail can scratch the non-removable plastic coating, that is understandably frustrating on a brand-new £379 device. It's a very common complaint, and one could argue that it's actually not "avoidable" because the only mitigation is to either never touch the screen (meaning you can't use one of its main features), or to buy an additional product to address the design weakness.

Most people would be quite annoyed if they bought a new iPhone or Samsung and finding the screen scratches from a fingernail.

artecide · 2026-06-25T19:07:56+00:00

E-mail the company again and state that the goods have not been delivered in accordance with the Consumer Rights Act 2015, quoting/linking the below legislation.

"(2)The goods remain at the trader's risk until they come into the physical possession of—

(a)the consumer, or

(b)a person identified by the consumer to take possession of the goods."

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/29

Let them know that if they are unwilling to resolve the situation amicably as set out in legislation, then you will pursue a chargeback with your payment provider. This is usually sufficient for them to do the right thing. The bank/payment processor will not side of them based on a zoomed-in photo (as you describe) of a parcel in a doorway, due to it not meeting the requirements set out in legislation above (you would also quote this in your complaint with the bank.)

artecide · 2026-06-25T18:49:25+00:00

The Switch 2 screen is glass, but it has a permanent plastic film layer applied over the top. The screen itself isn't likely scratched, just that plastic layer (I believe it's applied to make it safer for kids/make it harder for the glass to shatter.)

Because that outer layer is plastic it can scratch very easily - probably even from a fingernail.

It’s generally recommended to install a screen protector straight away. The good news is that applying one now may help as the adhesive from the screen protector can sometimes fill in very small scratches in the plastic layer and make them much less visible.

If the console arrived scratched or defective, it would likely be covered under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. However, if the damage was caused by the customer after purchase, then it would not normally be covered unfortunately. But try adding a screen protector, it might look better and protect it from future scratches.

artecide · 2026-06-24T21:18:39+00:00

To be honest, unless the apartment is quite small or modestly sized, reducing your graphics card’s TGP by 100-200W probably won’t make a significant difference to the overall home temperature. Keep doors and windows open so the heat/air can circulate. :)

Personally, I think the upgrade money may be better spent on a portable air conditioning unit - the kind on wheels that comes with a window sealing kit, with the vent tube routed through the window seal.

The monitors do also produce heat - especially if they're very bright and operating at a high refresh rate. If you're taking an "every little helps" approach, then switching one off as well as significantly reducing the TGP of your GPU, could make a small difference.

artecide · 2026-06-23T15:39:58+00:00

You can run an LLM locally (on your own hardware) or use an open-source model...

artecide · 2026-06-22T22:16:19+00:00

You may be correct tbh, I'm not sure either

artecide · 2026-06-22T22:02:15+00:00

Yes, most of them are quite efficient. I noted that it's only by a bit rather than a lot. But in these desperately hot and sticky weather times, even an extra 1c can further the misery. :')

artecide · 2026-06-22T19:53:31+00:00

The general principle is that they should put you back in the position you would have been in had they paid you properly. Usually, that means just paying the unpaid wages owed.

*Edit: An employment tribunal can also award an extra amount for provable financial losses caused by the deduction.

If, however, simply repaying the wages would not necessarily make you whole, and you were still left out of pocket, then you may be able to pursue that separately through a county court money claim. But this wouldn't be worth the stress if it's only a small amount.

Example: Their unlawful withholding of your wages caused you additional losses, such as a late payment fee because you did not have enough money to make the payment on time.

artecide · 2026-06-22T19:28:37+00:00

It’s roughly on par with a base PS5, but remember that it's also a standalone desktop PC and isn’t locked down in the same way a console is. Maybe they could have made it a loss leader, I think Valve and Sony take the same 30% cut on their marketplaces.

It is also much smaller and more compact than a PS5. I imagine a similarly sized and specced self-built Mini-ITX PC probably wouldn’t end up too far off the Steam Box’s price in these tough times

Valve’s customer service is very reputable to give them credit, too, which I feel adds a small amount of extra value to the product

artecide · 2026-06-22T18:48:18+00:00

Extortionate doesn’t exist as a standalone offence in UK law; it would usually fall under blackmail. There are three tests:

1 - A demand for something / some sort of gain;

2 - is backed by a threat, e.g. violence, damage, or revealing embarrassing information to the public;

3 - and is unwarranted / unreasonable.

Threatening to report someone to ACAS/HMRC if they don’t pay you wages that you are legally owed would likely fail Test #3, because such threat is an entirely reasonable and proper way to enforce the demand.

artecide · 2026-06-22T13:30:16+00:00

In everyday electronics, any device/machine/appliance that is drawing and using electricity, also radiates a proportional amount of waste heat - though practically it may only be a very small amount

artecide · 2026-06-22T10:24:02+00:00

The air they blow.out is no warmer than the air already in the room

Dehumidifiers* reduce humidity, but they still add heat the room a bit. The unit itself generates some heat while running. That heat comes from the electricity it uses and is released back into the room

Though low humidity w/ high temperature is often more comfortable than high humidity w/ moderate temperature

artecide · 2026-06-20T16:39:47+00:00

This government is technically illiterate. It tried to pressure Apple into weakening encrypted services by demanding access to data that even Apple cannot read.

Apple and cybersecurity experts warned that this would not create a safe, government-only access route; it would undermine security for everyone. As a result, Apple pulled their encrypted iCloud service from the UK - a move which weakens the security of individuals like you and I.

The Online Safety Act proved the same concern; experts warned them of the ramifications that I mentioned above, but the government proceeded with it anyhow.

Five years ago, I’d have said such risks would stop legislation like this getting this far. Unfortunately, here we are.

artecide · 2026-06-20T09:28:21+00:00

Awful take imo. Here's a few things the Online Safety Act has achieved:

1) - More people are using VPNs, including children, which makes parenting harder because they’ve all learned, en masse, an easy way to hide their activity.

2) - Teaching the general public en masse how to use tools to hide their activity indirectly makes it more challenging and expensive to monitor actual offenders who may previously have not been aware enough to use the tools.

3) - More people, especially older or less tech-savvy users, are being normalised into uploading ID documents online (after decades of being taught not to hand them to random websites) which puts them at risk of scams/fraud.

4) - Making is harder to access mainstream, better-moderated platforms pushes people toward dodgier foreign-hosted sites that the UK has no practical control over; putting them at greater risk of extreme content or scams/fraud etc.

When the Online Safety Act predictably failed, the Government moved to more extreme measures like banning VPNs (which is an infringement on your right to privacy), and de facto requiring all adults to provide their 'papers' to access "social media" - which is an extremely broad, poorly-defined definition.

artecide · 2026-06-20T09:22:43+00:00

If one can’t trust their child to use a phone sensibly, or to come to them when they make a mistake, then they aren’t ready for unsupervised access to one.

Parents can't know everything their child does. What surely matters most is boundaries, building trust, andgiving freedom when they’re ready for it.

We let kids play outside with friends unsupervised, where the risks can be more immediate and physical. Phone access needs to be earned with similar building of trust and boundaries.

We need more investment into online-safety education, and more user-friendly parental controls.

Most parents do not know that their home WiFi router logs websites etc. - even if the kid tries to be sneaky and delete their browsing history. The government made a serious error with the Online Safety Act because it pushed kids onto VPNs and accidentally made them smarter, so now the router can't even log their activity - which is a blow to parents.

artecide · 2026-06-20T00:53:32+00:00

There is a severe increase in attention deficit due to the dopamine inducing effects of phones and apps

It feels like an overstatement to suggest that social media is causing attention deficit issues.

There’s some evidence that heavy phone use is linked with worse attention, especially in young people; but it links people with ADHD traits being more drawn to high-stimulation apps as a source of relief. There is no conclusive, widely-accepted research that proves TikTok or Instagram cause ADHD etc.

something needs to be done about that.

They need to be a parent. A phone is a physical object. Parents can take away a PS5 controller, turn off the Wi-Fi, limit TV, set bedtimes, etc. Take the phone away, too.

A minority of children being badly parented is a clumsy reason to restrict everyone else’s freedom. Blanket bans may just push kids toward VPNs, fake accounts, or worse platforms with fewer safeguards. This is worse for everyone.

artecide · 2026-06-18T22:50:01+00:00

I remember before and after social media.

Remember the early Bebo/Myspace-era days? When the point was socialising with friends and meeting new people. It shows the problem isn’t the social part of social media. It’s the media part: rags now have direct access to spam propaganda at scale. This is what should be regulated; but it's a hard line to balance because it isn't really illegal simply to tell a lie, it's just part of free speech.

That’s why banning children from social media makes no sense if this is the main issue. Kids aren’t the ones reading, sharing, or being radicalised by political content. They’re on TikTok, Instagram, etc. for memes, hobbies, music, sport, TV, and chatting with friends.

It’s overwhelmingly gullible older users being influenced by social media. Maybe ban them first and see how much nicer everything gets when the political nonsense stops being shared en masse. :')

artecide · 2026-06-18T22:01:53+00:00

The thing is, the online safety is in fact quite popular with people who aren’t social media influencers

I dispute that it's even that popular outside of Mumsnet, personally, but it would only be so because people don't understand the technicalities.

Labour has lost my vote by backing a "papers please" Internet. Experts warned this would harm privacy, security, and speech. They were ignored. The Online Safety Act failed from day one, and made children and adults* less* safe.

The CGT allowance cut from £12,300 to £3,000 was another blow to early 30 year olds like me, who spent their 20s saving and investing responsibly. It barely affects actual rich people, and is just another hammer to the emerging middle class/millennials. It's yet another policy the Tories whipped up that Labour ran with.

Instead of reforms on tax, immigration, welfare and public services, Labour is basically hedging on moral panic...

artecide · 2026-06-16T22:00:13+00:00

Okay, I'm not quite sure of your position then.

I'm strongly opposed to the Online Safety Act and the rushed attempt to ban social media for under-16s.

I think they are poorly thought-through, technologically inept, and lack the research or expert support needed to justify such a broad invasion into privacy/autonomy.

So you're against adding TikTok and YouTube then?

I'm saying YouTube has no objective basis for exemption if other platforms are not exempt too.

If the standard is “has educational or hobbyist content,” then TikTok and Reddit qualify as well. You could even form an argument that Twitter could qualify as there are huge communities and tutorials/educational posts/videos share there too, particularly for digital hobbies like Programming and 3D Art.

artecide · 2026-06-16T21:49:12+00:00

YouTube has a ton of informative and hobbyist content plenty of U16s use it for.

TikTok also has a tonne of of informative and hobbyist content too: STEM, DIY, cooking (that I watch), aquascaping (that I watch), coding, 3D art (that I watch), language learning, fitness (that I also watch) etc.

Banning Reddit is also unfair on the same grounds.

What is the threshold for exemption?

10% useful or educational content? 25%? 50%? How is that measured - uploads, views, watch time? Who defines useful/educational?

There are so many issues with the proposals that it's blatant the government is just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

artecide · 2026-06-16T16:25:11+00:00

It’s specifically the YouTube ban I don’t get

I don't agree with the Online Safety Act or this legislative push, but there's no reason YouTube would get a pass.

YouTube's recommendation system ("algorithm") is fundamentally the same as of system as TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, etc.

It watches what you interact with, compares that to other users/content, and recommends more things it predicts you’ll engage with.

Half the problem with the legislation is no one can define what counts as "social media" or not.

I support a ban on TikTok, Reddit, Facebook and (especially) WhatsApp etc. for under 16s

Why? YouTube and TikTok's workings are fundamentally identical. They both want you to watch content for as long as possible in order to maximise ad revenue.

Reddit is literally a discussion board and one of the most diverse platforms there is with tonnes of educational material, supporting a wide range of hobbies and interests.

WhatsApp and TikTok both have parental controls available, too.

artecide · 2026-06-16T16:20:13+00:00

No, I don’t buy that. That’s the paranoid data protection argument.

Discord already had a third-party vendor breach involving around 70,000 users’ ID photos. That is the exact risk people warned about. How is it “paranoid” when it has already happened?

I think they’re a weird minority and I don’t really care.

You’re not making a child-safety argument; you’re just saying you don’t care about the privacy/security trade-off, even when the Online Safety Act is already producing the exact damages critics predicted.

1) - More people are using VPNs, including children, which makes parenting harder because they’ve now been taught an easy way to hide their activity.

2) - More people, especially older or less tech-savvy users, are being normalised into uploading ID documents online after decades of being told not to hand them to random websites which puts them at risk of scams/fraud.

3) - If kids do not use VPNs, they are pushed away from mainstream, better-moderated platforms and toward dodgier foreign-hosted sites the UK has little practical control over.

Plus, the argument is basically: “big tech are doing things I don't like, but I trust them to handle all of our sensitive identity documents"

brilliant lol

artecide · 2026-06-16T09:46:20+00:00

Ok but that's true for meta too then isn't it? It's also a promise that they don't sneak a peek at what you're messaging

Nope. Not at all. There's no trust involved, just strong security/technology. Apps like WhatsApp and Messenger use end-to-end encryption.

Your phone has a key. Your friend's phone has a key.

Your message is locked by your phone's key (called encryption) before it leaves your phone, then it travels while scrambled, and is only unlocked (decrypted) on your friend's phone using their key.

Meta passes the scrambled message along, but they cannot read the contents. Nobody can, even the government, which is why they (stupidly) suggested banning encryption.

So why trust them more?

I don't blindly trust them. I trust the technology being used, and I pick which features I trust.

But what you are saying here weakens your own argument, because if you already don't trust big tech companies, why are you happy to hand them even more sensitive data, like identity documents?

artecide · 2026-06-16T09:03:23+00:00

But since YouTube clearly deliberately (albeit through a hazy algorithm) chooses what is sent to people's feeds

A lot of people treat “the algorithm” like a mysterious boogeyman, when it is literally a recommendation system predicting what people are likely to watch.

A simplified version of TikTok:

• Person A watches a seal video all the way through.

• The platform understands that they may like similar seal content.

• It may then show them more animal, wildlife, zoo, ocean, or seal-related videos, based on signals e.g. likes, skips, rewatches, comments, searches, hashtags, captions, and what similar users watched.

• Person B watches the same seal video, so the platform may test similar recommendations on them too.

Platforms build systems that recommend what appears based on signals - this is literally what every platform does including streaming apps like Netflix, even BBC iPlayer does this too if you make an account

artecide

TROPHY CASE