NBA 2K26 is back with its usual hype, but honestly, how many times can we fall for the same tricks? The constant cycle of empty promises and underwhelming updates is exhausting! They keep announcing rendez-vous to showcase their "futures nouveautés," yet we know it’s just another round of recycled features and minor tweaks. Where's the innovation? Where's the respect for the loyal fans who’ve poured hours into this franchise? It’s time to hold developers accountable for their laziness! Enough with the marketing fluff—give us real improvements or just stop pretending you're pushing the envelope! The gaming community deserves better than this mediocrity! #NBA2K26 #GamingCommunity #InnovationNeeded #EnoughIsEnough #TechFail

Warning: This optical illusion will give you a headache! 🙃 Because who doesn't love a fun little game that turns your brain into a pretzel? Just when you thought staring at your screen was the most exhausting thing you could do, along comes this gem to redefine your limits. Remember, the key is to NOT stare for too long—because we all know how relaxing a headache can be! So, gather your friends, watch them squint and squirm, and enjoy the show. After all, nothing says "I've got my life together" like willingly subjecting yourself to a visual torturing machine for a few fleeting moments of confusion. #OpticalIllusion #MindGames #HeadacheAlert #VisualTrickery #Fun

It's absolutely infuriating how every Prime Day, we’re bombarded with the same tired iPad deals that barely change from year to year! Is it even Prime Day if we don't get anything innovative or exciting? The marketing teams behind these promotions are clearly out of touch with what consumers really need. Instead of meaningful discounts that reflect the actual value of these devices, we get gimmicks and relentless hype. Wake up, Amazon! If you're going to boast about Prime Day, at least deliver something worthy of the name! This constant cycle of mediocrity is exhausting and frankly unacceptable. #PrimeDay #iPadDeals #ConsumerFrustration #TechDisappointment #AmazonFail

Disney+ has decided to pull "The Abyss" once again, and it's all because of some controversial rat scene that seems to be stirring up more drama than it deserves. Honestly, who cares? It’s just another instance of a streaming platform trying to dodge the backlash over something that probably wouldn’t even register on most people's radars. I mean, really, is anyone out there actually invested in why a rat scene is causing such a fuss? It feels like a lot of noise over nothing. Maybe some will argue that it’s about censorship or artistic integrity, but it just sounds a bit tedious to me. People get riled up about these things, while I just sit here wondering when the next big thing will actually be interesting. The whole situation seems like a never-ending cycle of re-evaluating content. Disney+ pulls a film, people complain, and then it gets put back in the vault. It’s like watching a rerun of a show you didn’t even like the first time. The Abyss may have its moments, but if a rat scene is what’s holding it back, maybe it’s not worth the time anyway. Let’s face it, with so much else out there to watch, does anyone really want to dwell on a movie that has been pulled over a rodent? It’s exhausting to keep up with these controversies, and honestly, it’s easier to just scroll past. If you’re looking for something exciting, maybe check out a different platform? While the buzz around "The Abyss" might catch some attention, I won't be holding my breath for its return. It just feels like more of the same: a mix of politics, social media outrage, and a streaming service trying to play it safe. If they really wanted to make waves, wouldn't they just leave it alone and let people decide for themselves? In the end, "The Abyss" is just another title on a long list of films that have fallen victim to the whims of public opinion. So, let’s just move on to something else, shall we? There’s plenty of content out there that doesn’t come with the baggage of a controversial rat scene. #DisneyPlus #TheAbyss #FilmControversy #StreamingNews #Boredom

The protests in Los Angeles have brought a lot of attention, but honestly, it’s just the same old story. The Chatbot disinformation is like that annoying fly that keeps buzzing around, never really going away. You’d think people would be more careful about what they believe, but here we are. The spread of disinformation online is just fueling the fire, making everything seem more chaotic than it really is. It’s kind of exhausting to see the same patterns repeat. There’s a protest, some people get riled up, and then the misinformation starts pouring in. It’s like a never-ending cycle. Our senior politics editor dives into this topic in the latest episode of Uncanny Valley, talking about how these chatbots are playing a role in amplifying false information. Not that many people seem to care, though. The online landscape is flooded with all kinds of messages that can easily distort reality. It’s almost as if people are too tired to fact-check anymore. Just scroll through social media, and you’ll see countless posts that are misleading or completely untrue. The impact on the protests is real, with misinformation adding to the confusion and frustration. One could argue that it’s a bit depressing, really. As the protests continue, it’s hard to see a clear path forward. Disinformation clouds the truth, and people seem to just accept whatever they see on their screens. It’s all so monotonous. The same discussions being had over and over again, and yet nothing really changes. The chatbots keep generating content, and the cycle goes on. Honestly, it makes you wonder whether anyone is actually listening or if they’re just scrolling mindlessly. The discussions about the protests and the role of disinformation should be enlightening, but they often feel repetitive and bland. It’s hard to muster any excitement when the conversations feel so stale. In the end, it’s just more noise in a world that’s already too loud. The protests might be important, but the chatbots and their disinformation are just taking away from the real issues at hand. This episode of Uncanny Valley might shed some light, but will anyone really care? Who knows. #LosAngelesProtests #Disinformation #Chatbots #UncannyValley #Misinformation

Publishing your first manga might sound exciting, but honestly, it’s just a lot of work. It’s one of those things that you think will be fun, but then you realize it’s just a long journey filled with endless sketches and revisions. Six top manga artists talk about their experiences, but let’s be real, it’s not all that thrilling. First off, you have to come up with a story. Sounds easy, right? But then you sit there staring at a blank page, and the ideas just don’t come. You read what other artists say about their success, and it makes you feel like you should have everything figured out. They talk about characters and plots like it’s the easiest thing in the world. But between you and me, it’s exhausting. Then comes the drawing part. Sure, you might enjoy sketching sometimes, but doing it for hours every day? That’s where the fun starts to fade. You’ll probably go through phases where you hate your own art. It’s a cycle of drawing, erasing, and feeling disappointed. It’s not a glamorous process; it’s just a grind. After you’ve finally got something that resembles a story and some pages that are somewhat decent, you have to think about publishing. This is where the anxiety kicks in. Do you self-publish? Try to find a publisher? Each option has its own set of problems. You read advice from those six artists, and they all sound like they’ve got it figured out. But honestly, who has the energy to deal with all those logistics? Marketing is another thing. They say you need to promote yourself, build a following, and all that jazz. But scrolling through social media to post about your manga feels more like a chore than a fun activity. You might think you’ll enjoy it, but it’s just more work piled on top of everything else. In the end, the best advice might be to just get through it and hope for the best. You’ll survive the experience, maybe even learn something, but it’s not going to be a walk in the park. If you’re looking for a carefree journey, publishing your first manga probably isn’t it. So, yeah. That’s the reality. It’s not as glamorous as it sounds. You just do it, and hope that someday it might feel rewarding. But until then, it’s just a lot of waiting and wondering. Good luck, I guess. #Manga #Publishing #MangaArtists #Comics #ArtProcess

This is a spoiler-free preview of the first five episodes of season three. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds ended its second season with arguably the single strongest run of any streaming-era Trek. The show was made with such confidence in all departments that if there were flaws, you weren’t interested in looking for them. Since then, it’s gone from being the best modern Trek, to being the only modern Trek. Unfortunately, at the moment it needs to be the standard bearer for the show, it’s become noticeably weaker and less consistent.  As usual, I’ve seen the first five episodes, but can’t reveal specifics about what I’ve seen. I can say plenty of the things that made Strange New Worlds the best modern-day live-action Trek remain in place. It’s a show that’s happy for you to spend time with its characters as they hang out, and almost all of them are deeply charming. This is, after all, a show that uses as motif the image of the crew in Pike’s quarters as the captain cooks for his crew. Its format, with standalone adventures blended with serialized character drama, means it can offer something new every week. Think back to the first season, when “Memento Mori,” a tense action thriller with the Gorn, was immediately followed by “Spock Amock,” a goofy, starbase-set body-swap romantic comedy of manners centered around Spock. Strange New Worlds is the first Trek in a long while to realize audiences don’t just want a ceaseless slog of stern-faced, angry grimdark. And if they want that, they can go watch Picard and Section 31. Marni Grossman/Paramount+ But, as much as those things are SNW’s greatest strength, it’s a delicate balance to ensure the series doesn’t lurch too far either way. And, it pains me to say this, the show spends the first five episodes of its third season going too far in both directions. No specifics, but one episode I’m sure was on the same writers room whiteboard wishlist as last season’s musical episode. What was clearly intended as a chance for everyone to get out of their usual roles and have fun falls flat. Because the episode can never get past the sense it’s too delighted in its own silliness to properly function. Marni Grossman/Paramount+ At the other end of the scale, we get sprints toward the eye-gouging grimdark that blighted those other series. Sure, the series has gone to dark places before, but previously with more of a sense of deftness, rather than just going for the viscerally-upsetting gore. A cynic might suggest that, as Paramount’s other Trek projects ended, franchise-overseer Alex Kurtzman — who has pushed the franchise into “grittier” territory whenever he can — had more time to spend in the SNW writers’ room. Much as I’ve enjoyed the series’ soapier elements, the continuing plotlines take up an ever bigger part of each episode’s runtime so far. Consequently, the story of the week gets less service, making them feel weaker and less coherent. One episode pivots two thirds of the way in to act as a low-key sequel to an episode from season two. But since we’ve only got ten minutes left, it feels thrown in as an afterthought, or to resolve a thread the creative team felt they were obliged to deal with. In fact, this and the recently-finished run of Doctor Who suffered from the same problem that blights so many streaming-era shows, which is the limited episode order. Rather than producing TV on the scale broadcast networks were able to — yearly runs of 22-, 24- or 26 episodes, a lot ofgenre shows get less than half that. The result is that each episode has to be More Important Than The Last One in a way that’s exhausting for a viewer. But Strange New Worlds can’t solve all the economic issues with the streaming model on its own. My hope is that, much like in its first season, the weaker episodes are all in its front half to soften us up for the moments of quality that followed toward its conclusion. ASIDE: Shortly before publication, Paramount announced Strange New Worlds would end in its fifth season, which would be cut from ten episodes to six. It's not surprising — given the equally-brilliant Lower Decks was also axed after passing the same milestone — but it is disappointing. My only hope is that the series doesn't spend that final run awkwardly killing off the series' young ensemble one by one in order to replace them with the entire original series' roster as to make it "line up." Please, let them be their own things. This article originally appeared on Engadget at #star #trek #strange #new #worlds

We are told to customize, expand, and provide more options, but that might be a silent killer for our conversion rate. Using behavioral psychology and modern product design, this piece explains why brands like Apple use fewer, smarter choices to convert better.Image generated using ChatgptJam-packed decisionsImagine standing in a supermarket aisle in front of the jam section. How do you decide which jam to buy? You could go for your usual jam, or maybe this is your first time buying jam. Either way, a choice has to be made. Or does it?You may have seen the vast number of choices, gotten overwhelmed, and walked away. The same scenario was reflected in the findings of a 2000 study by Iyengar and Lepper that explored how the number of choice options can affect decision-making.Iyengar and Lepper set up two scenarios; the first customers in a random supermarket being offered 24 jams for a free tasting. In another, they were offered only 6. One would expect that the first scenario would see more sales. After all, more variety means a happier customer. However:Image created using CanvaWhile 60% of customers stopped by for a tasting, only 3% ended up making a purchase.On the other hand, when faced with 6 options, 40% of customers stopped by, but 30% of this number ended up making a purchase.The implications of the study were evident. While one may think that more choices are better when faced with the same, decision-makers prefer fewer.This phenomenon is known as the Paradox of Choice. More choice leads to less satisfaction because one gets overwhelmed.This analysis paralysis results from humans being cognitive misers that is decisions that require deeper thinking feel exhausting and like they come at a cognitive cost. In such scenarios, we tend not to make a choice or choose a default option. Even after a decision has been made, in many cases, regret or the thought of whether you have made the ‘right’ choice can linger.A sticky situationHowever, a 2010 meta-analysis by Benjamin Scheibehenne was unable to replicate the findings. Scheibehenne questioned whether it was choice overload or information overload that was the issue. Other researchers have argued that it is the lack of meaningful choice that affects satisfaction. Additionally, Barry Schwartz, a renowned psychologist and the author of the book ‘The Paradox of Choice: Why Less Is More,’ also later suggested that the paradox of choice diminishes in the presence of a person’s knowledge of the options and if the choices have been presented well.Does that mean the paradox of choice was an overhyped notion? I conducted a mini-study to test this hypothesis.From shelves to spreadsheets: testing the jam jar theoryI created a simple scatterplot in R using a publicly available dataset from the Brazilian e-commerce site Olist. Olist is Brazil’s largest department store on marketplaces. After delivery, customers are asked to fill out a satisfaction survey with a rating or comment option. I analysed the relationship between the number of distinct products in a categoryand the average customer review.Scatterplot generated in R using the Olist datasetBased on the almost horizontal regression line on the plot above, it is evident that more choice does not lead to more satisfaction. Furthermore, categories with fewer than 200 products tend to have average review scores between 4.0 and 4.3. Whereas, categories with more than 1,000 products do not have a higher average satisfaction score, with some even falling below 4.0. This suggests that more choices do not equal more satisfaction and could also reduce satisfaction levels.These findings support the Paradox of Choice, and the dataset helps bring theory into real-world commerce. A curation of lesser, well-presented, and differentiated options could lead to more customer satisfaction.Image created using CanvaFurthermore, the plot could help suggest a more nuanced perspective; people want more choices, as this gives them autonomy. However, beyond a certain point, excessive choice overwhelms rather than empowers, leaving people dissatisfied. Many product strategies reflect this insight: the goal is to inspire confident decision-making rather than limiting freedom. A powerful example of this shift in thinking comes from Apple’s history.Simple tastes, sweeter decisionsImage source: Apple InsiderIt was 1997, and Steve Jobs had just made his return to Apple. The company at the time offered 40 different products; however, its sales were declining. Jobs made one question the company’s mantra,“What are the four products we should be building?”The following year, Apple saw itself return to profitability after introducing the iMac G3. While its success can be attributed to the introduction of a new product line and increased efficiency, one cannot deny that the reduction in the product line simplified the decision-making process for its consumers.To this day, Apple continues to implement this strategy by having a few SKUs and confident defaults.Apple does not just sell premium products; it sells a premium decision-making experience by reducing friction in decision-making for the consumer.Furthermore, a 2015 study based on analyzing scenarios where fewer choice options led to increased sales found the following mitigating factors in buying choices:Time Pressure: Easier and quicker choices led to more sales.Complexity of options: The easier it was to understand what a product was, the better the outcome.Clarity of Preference: How easy it was to compare alternatives and the clarity of one’s preferences.Motivation to Optimize: Whether the consumer wanted to put in the effort to find the ‘best’ option.Picking the right spreadWhile the extent of the validity of the Paradox of Choice is up for debate, its impact cannot be denied. It is still a helpful model that can be used to drive sales and boost customer satisfaction. So, how can one use it as a part of your business’s strategy?Remember, what people want isn’t 50 good choices. They want one confident, easy-to-understand decision that they think they will not regret.Here are some common mistakes that confuse consumers and how you can apply the Jam Jar strategy to curate choices instead:Image is created using CanvaToo many choices lead to decision fatigue.Offering many SKU options usually causes customers to get overwhelmed. Instead, try curating 2–3 strong options that will cover the majority of their needs.2. Being dependent on the users to use filters and specificationsWhen users have to compare specifications themselves, they usually end up doing nothing. Instead, it is better to replace filters with clear labels like “Best for beginners” or “Best for oily skin.”3. Leaving users to make comparisons by themselvesToo many options can make users overwhelmed. Instead, offer default options to show what you recommend. This instills within them a sense of confidence when making the final decision.4. More transparency does not always mean more trustInformation overload never leads to conversions. Instead, create a thoughtful flow that guides the users to the right choices.5. Users do not aim for optimizationAssuming that users will weigh every detail before making a decision is not rooted in reality. In most cases, they will go with their gut. Instead, highlight emotional outcomes, benefits, and uses instead of numbers.6. Not onboarding users is a critical mistakeHoping that users will easily navigate a sea of products without guidance is unrealistic. Instead, use onboarding tools like starter kits, quizzes, or bundles that act as starting points.7. Variety for the sake of varietyUsers crave clarity more than they crave variety. Instead, focus on simplicity when it comes to differentiation.And lastly, remember that while the paradox of choice is a helpful tool in your business strategy arsenal, more choice is not inherently bad. It is the lack of structure in the decision-making process that is the problem. Clear framing will always make decision-making a seamless experience for both your consumers and your business.How jam jars explain Apple’s success was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story. #how #jam #jars #explain #apples

This article is a sponsored by TetraLogical Neurodivergent needs are often considered as an edge case that doesn’t fit into common user journeys or flows. Neurodiversity tends to get overlooked in the design process. Or it is tackled late in the process, and only if there is enough time. But people aren’t edge cases. Every person is just a different person, performing tasks and navigating the web in a different way. So how can we design better, more inclusive experiences that cater to different needs and, ultimately, benefit everyone? Let’s take a closer look. Neurodiversity Or Neurodivergent? There is quite a bit of confusion about both terms on the web. Different people think and experience the world differently, and neurodiversity sees differences as natural variations, not deficits. It distinguishes between neurotypical and neurodivergent people. Neurotypical people see the world in a “typical” and widely perceived as expected way. Neurodivergent people experience the world differently, for example, people with ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia, synesthesia, and hyperlexia. According to various sources, around 15–40% of the population has neurodivergent traits. These traits can be innateor acquired. But they are always on a spectrum, and vary a lot. A person with autism is not neurodiverse — they are neurodivergent. One of the main strengths of neurodivergent people is how imaginative and creative they are, coming up with out-of-the-box ideas quickly. With exceptional levels of attention, strong long-term memory, a unique perspective, unbeatable accuracy, and a strong sense of justice and fairness. Being different in a world that, to some degree, still doesn’t accept these differences is exhausting. So unsurprisingly, neurodivergent people often bring along determination, resilience, and high levels of empathy. Design With People, Not For Them As a designer, I often see myself as a path-maker. I’m designing reliable paths for people to navigate to their goals comfortably. Without being blocked. Or confused. Or locked out. That means respecting the simple fact that people’s needs, tasks, and user journeys are all different, and that they evolve over time. And: most importantly, it means considering them very early in the process. Better accessibility is better for everyone. Instead of making decisions that need to be reverted or refined to be compliant, we can bring a diverse group of people — with accessibility needs, with neurodiversity, frequent and infrequent users, experts, newcomers — in the process, and design with them, rather than for them. Neurodiversity & Inclusive Design Resources A wonderful resource that helps us design for cognitive accessibility is Stéphanie Walter’s Neurodiversity and UX toolkit. It includes practical guidelines, tools, and resources to better understand and design for dyslexia, dyscalculia, autism, and ADHD. Another fantastic resource is Will Soward’s Neurodiversity Design System. It combines neurodiversity and user experience design into a set of design standards and principles that you can use to design accessible learning interfaces. Last but not least, I’ve been putting together a few summaries about neurodiversity and inclusive design over the last few years, so you might find them helpful, too: ADHD Autism Children Colorblindness Deafness Dyscalculia Dyslexia Legibility Left-Handed Users Mental Health Motivation Older Adults Screen Readers Teenagers A huge thank-you to everyone who has been writing, speaking, and sharing articles, resources, and toolkits on designing for diversity. The topic is often forgotten and overlooked, but it has an incredible impact. 👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾 #designing #neurodiversity