Latest news with #ghosting
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Let's Talk About Why Some Folks Are Really Unhappy With The Switch 2's Screen
Ever since we learned the Switch 2 would have an LCD screen instead of a fancier OLED panel, discourse around Nintendo's latest console has often turned sour when it comes to its display. Of course, once folks were able to get the new hardware in their hands, the Switch 2 revealed itself to be packing an impressively bright and vibrant LCD. Those do exist; they're still not as great as fancy as an OLED, but liquid crystal display tech is still more than capable of meeting and exceeding expectations for producing a quality image in 2025. But now a new controversy over the Switch 2's display has emerged, this time wielding scary terms like 'ghosting' and 'refresh rate,' as critiques spread asserting that fast-paced games look blurry in motion and concerns rise from some arguing that the HDR display packed in with Nintendo's new hybrid console isn't really HDR. Are they right? Kind of, yeah! Should you regret your decision to buy a Nintendo Switch 2? Probably not! Let's talk. I'm sorry to tell you that video games are an illusion. Mario isn't actually moving when he jumps. As you probably already know, GPUs crunch out one image at a time and these images, when played very fast, create the illusion of motion. We're seeing several images of Mario, with each image showing him in a slightly different location. And our screen needs to display those images cleanly, at a rapid, matching pace. That's a very brisk and incomplete explanation of how video games deliver the visuals we know and love, but it's more or less how it all works. The way the image gets delivered to your eyes relies on coordination between how fast the GPU can pump out images and how often your monitor refreshes, which is measured in Hertz. Should those things be out of sync in some way, you'll spot some screen tearing, which is when there's a mismatch between how many images the GPU spits out per second and how many times the monitor refreshes too (in case you didn't know, all monitors are actually turning on and off at very fast speeds that give the illusion of staying on). But we can also measure the refresh rate in milliseconds, and that's where we can really lock into some specificity and understand what's going on. The lower the millisecond response time, the cleaner the motion of something moving across the screen looks. Ratchet that response time up and things start to look a little blurry in motion. 120Hz is a swell refresh rate for a gaming display. The problem with the Switch 2, however, is that the millisecond response time of its screen is a bit slow compared to those of many other gaming displays on the market. Compounding the problem is that we actually can't fully test the Switch 2's screen as efficiently as we can other displays. The Switch 2 doesn't allow for external video input. So, as PC Mag's Will Greenwald discusses in his breakdown of the latest Switch controversy, folks have been taking to measuring how quickly pixels change color on the Switch 2 screen using optical sensors and cameras, among other tools. This is technically not the same thing as measuring the refresh rate as mentioned above, but it does offer insight into how fast the screen performs. Objectively, the Switch 2's screen might have some shortcomings, but your experience with it is subjective. The results of these tests revealed a 17.1 millisecond response time on the Switch 2 in a best case scenario, and a 33.3 ms response time at worst. As Greenwald mentions, gaming displays should ideally aim for below 10 ms. So no, it's not just in people's heads. Maybe they're being picky! But in reality, the Switch 2's response time isn't great compared to other gaming displays. Knowing that fact, though, shouldn't keep you from having fun with your console. By 2025, many are likely familiar with what High Dynamic Range is: an expansion of how just how bright or dark a screen can display colors. An HDR display (with a signal to match) looks far more vivid and lifelike than an SDR (Standard Dynamic Range) screen does. And it's awesome. To my eyes, HDR is more of an upgrade than 4K resolution could've ever dreamed of being. But comparing the Switch 2's HDR to a fancier HDR screen is sort of like comparing organic food to certified organic food. Technically speaking, the Switch 2's brightness range at less than 1,000 nits falls short of what is needed to portray a true HDR image. So it's got a Higher Dynamic Range than SDR, but is arguably not true HDR. Yeah, you know what? Nothing's ever good enough for you. Let's just burn the whole thing down—sorry, I dunno where that came from. Silly me. No, as anyone who's seen a Switch 2 in person can attest, the screen looks great! Games look bright and colorful as we'd expect them to. Sure, if you have a serious eye for detail and you're a numbers nerd, you may feel the screen could've hit higher benchmarks. And sadly, hooking your Switch 2 up to a better display via the dock doesn't seem to fix the problem as, according to PC Mag, external display output of the Switch 2 seems to stay true to what its internal screen can display. Coming from someone who has formative, joyous memories of GTA IV, Halo 3, Mass Effect, and BioShock from my old Xbox 360 hooked up to an old, tiny, somewhat faulty CRT in the corner of a basement, inferior tech doesn't always mean an inferior experience. Objectively, the Switch 2's screen might have some shortcomings, but your experience with it is subjective. So tune all the noise out if it upsets you, enjoy another lap on Mario Kart World and stop thinking about all this ms-time and HDR nonsense. . For the latest news, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
Washington Post
5 days ago
- General
- Washington Post
Carolyn Hax: Friend cuts ties after being called on hurtful remark
Adapted from online discussions. Hi, Carolyn: One of my dearest friends has decided to cut ties. I was venting about work. She said something super mean, and I told her that she hurt my feelings. That was eight months ago. She has not answered texts or calls. This is a person who officiated my wedding and hosted my baby shower, but also in 30 years has never once apologized for anything. She did this once before and came around after a year of silence. This time I am super mad and hurt. I do expect to run into her at some point, or for her to pop back up like nothing has happened. I know (from your past columns) that it is up to me whether to let her back into my life if she does this. But how do I get over the tremendous hurt and decide whether I have had enough? She has a very special place in my life, but at this point I am also just hurt. — Ghosted by a Friend Ghosted by a Friend: You might not know until she does her pop-up thing, and that's okay. See what she says (and doesn't), then see how you feel. Be ready to say: 'I'm not sure how I feel about your popping up as if nothing happened, after months of ignoring me. It's my turn to take some time.' If you struggle to say how hurt and angry you feel and how messed up it is that she does this, then try writing it down. It is, of course, her issue entirely. She is the one with coping mechanisms — if we can call them that — so dysfunctional, twisted and weak that she has to run away from her own discomfort instead of facing it, like admitting fault. So many kinds of wow. And sad. After 30 years, you would think she could risk the vulnerability of 'Sorry' with you. Clearly not. I hope she does — but don't expect her to — reengage with you enough for you to make this point with her. That's something you can decide now: Her unwillingness to listen or apologize can mean the friendship has run its course. Or you can decide her limits are who she is. Dear Carolyn: I have the opportunity to go for a promotion at work. It would mean more hours, occasional late nights and more responsibility. I would have, let's say, 15 percent less freedom than I do now. In discussing the choice with my husband, he asked whether the salary increase would make up for that loss of freedom. That led to a discussion in which I discovered we are currently nowhere close to living what I think of as a 'nice life' — enough money for necessities plus occasional leisure. We are almost always scratching to pay for this or that unexpected expense, and we don't even have children! Now I'm feeling depressed and paralyzed about the decision because it seems to be a choice between freedom and security. A total career overhaul is not an option right now. How do I make this decision? — A Nice Life A Nice Life: Maybe I'm being obtuse, but if you're unhappy as is, then why not go for the promotion? See if more money helps. It won't solve the immediate problem of feeling under-leisured, but staying where you are won't solve it, either. So give ambition a try. Chances to step back down are available daily. I realize this demands time and money, the exact two commodities you feel starved of right now, but a few sessions with a therapist, coach and/or financial planner could be a good investment to help you clarify your goals.
Independent Singapore
14-06-2025
- Business
- Independent Singapore
‘Is this considered normal in SG?' — Jobseeker says interviewer ghosted her after they collected her payslips, income letter, tax letter, and referee contact details
SINGAPORE: A jobseeker shared on Reddit that she was ghosted by a prospective employer after completing several rounds of interviews and submitting multiple personal documents. Posting anonymously on the r/askSingapore subreddit, she explained that she had applied for a position that was originally advertised as a full-time, permanent role. After several interviews, however, the company informed her that the job would now be offered as a 12-month contract instead. They cited her career break and previous history of short-term roles as factors behind the decision to switch her to a contract position. Despite the revised terms, she chose to proceed with the application. The company then asked for her 'payslips, an income letter, a tax letter, and the contact details of her referees,' stating that these were needed to prepare the job offer. Unfortunately, after providing the necessary documents, she heard nothing more from the company. 'They completely ghosted me for a month now,' she said. 'Is this considered normal or fair in Singapore? Or should I be concerned that my info was used? Would love to hear others' or HR professionals' thoughts on this. Thanks,' she added. 'Your best option is to move on…' In the discussion thread, a Singaporean working in human resources said the whole thing sounded super shady. They explained that when a company is preparing an employment contract, the only document typically required is the NRIC. They added that there is usually no valid reason for a legitimate company to request income letters or tax documents at the hiring stage. The person suggested that whoever was asking for all these documents might not be a real employer but could be trying to collect sensitive personal data. 'It sounds as if some scammer wants your data instead of a company. This seems so BS. Referral contact makes sense. But if they ghost you, sometimes it MIGHT also be because they said some stuff that doesn't align with what they want,' they added. Another Redditor commented, 'Red flag. You noticed it. If you don't move on, then any problem you face in the future is on you.' A third wrote, 'No, not normal at all. I would have pushed back on the income letter and tax letter, and even for pay slips, I would have redacted certain information. This company is sus as hell.' A fourth advised, 'There are many things that could have happened. Your references didn't work out, the company strategy changed, the hiring manager or HR left, there is a hiring pause because of tariffs/war, etc. It's not ideal, but nothing to be concerned about. I know it sucks when you were so close to landing a job, but your best option is to move on.' MOM: Only job-related info should be requested While the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not explicitly prohibit employers from requesting documents such as income letters or tax records, such requests are generally uncommon. For payslips, candidates have the right to decline if they are uncomfortable sharing them. Moreover, as per their guidelines, employers should only collect information that is directly relevant to assessing a candidate's suitability for the role. This includes qualifications, work experience, and job-related skills. See also Leisure marketplace SelenaGO raises seed funding from UMG Idealab Application forms should also avoid questions about personal details such as race, religion, marital status, pregnancy, or disability, unless there is a clear and valid reason related to the job. Read also: $1.5K a month and drowning': 27-year-old creative worker shares fears about the future Featured image by Depositphotos (for illustration purposes only)
News.com.au
13-06-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
Jobs marketplace says ‘ghosting' of Gen Z jobseekers is rife
Sarah* sent an email she never expected to get a response to. The 23-year-old had just graduated from a communications and media degree in Melbourne and sent a 'cold email' to an employer at her dream job. She was shocked when she heard back and was told there was a role 'that would be perfect' for her. 'The only problem is that it was in Sydney. I told them I was based in Melbourne but would be willing to move if the role suited,' she told 'This was me potentially relocating my whole life so I took it very seriously.' Things progressed fast and within days she was invited for an interview. It lasted 40 minutes and her interviewer seemed 'very excited and enthusiastic'. After three weeks, Sarah contacted the office again. She was invited for a second interview that lasted an hour. 'They seemed very into me and really positive. They said to me, 'Don't wig out if you don't hear back, we'll get back to you'.' That was mid-November last year. She has been ghosted ever since. 'They went out of their way to say, 'don't worry, we'll contact you' and then I never heard anything,' Sarah said. She has since found work but the experience left a bitter taste in her mouth. And she is not alone. A Sydney jobs marketplace says ghosting is one of the most common experiences for jobseekers. The co-founder and CEO of employment website Hatch, Adam Jacobs, said jobseekers were reporting disturbingly high rates of ghosting. Hatch conducted a poll in which 80 per cent of respondents reported ghosting 75 per cent of the time they were looking for jobs. They said it left them 'frustrated', 'feeling unemployable although I am very skilled', 'questioning thewhole system', 'defeated, unsure and on edge' and 'frustrated and anxious'. One said: 'It makes me feel terrible. If I was not accepted, I would still like a response to add rejection to my Excel sheet.' Jacobs, who also co-founded THE ICONIC, wants his new venture Hatch to 'ghost bust' the jobs space. 'When we talk to candidates about their experience of looking for jobs, ghosting is always top of the list of their frustrations,' he said. 'When someone's applying for a job, it's a nerve-wracking experience. They're putting themselves out there and when they don't hear back, it's incredibly demoralising. MORE: 8 jobs you can do while travelling 'It also gives the candidate a very negative impression of that employer and their brand. The risk for employers is not just that they demotivate that one candidate, but that they build a reputation in the market of someone who doesn't get back to you, and that can really damage their ability to attract high-quality candidates.' Hatch is asking young Australians to have their say on in this year's Hatch's Hotlist survey, which is focusing on ghosting and the use of AI in job hunting, as well as finding out which Australian employers people most want to work at. Last year's Hatch Hotlist from the start-up that pitches itself as Seek for Gen Z found that jobseekers want three things from employers. Culture was at the top of the list, fair pay was second and hybrid, flexible working was third. More than 3000 people voted for the companies they most wanted to work for, including Airtasker, Amazon, Canva, Google and Qantas. previously reported that young people applying for jobs were being brushed off, rejected and ghosted by companies and recruiters. Zoe Lo, 24, said she had applied for 100 jobs over a four-month period and was rejected or ghosted by roughly three-quarters of those. Of those jobs, some were graduate programs and others were full-time roles in marketing, PR or social media. 'For many graduate roles you have to do an online assessment round as well, so I did a few of those for different companies,' she said. In one recent video, the 24-year-old claimed that she was at the point in her job search where she did 'not care anymore'.At this point in time, she had applied to about 95 jobs and said that she knew it 'sounded bad' but she couldn't 'fake' caring about getting a job. Ms Lo said her mindset had shifted, noting that when she first started her job hunt she was worried about being unemployed and felt stressed about finding a job immediately.'Now I am like, OK I am unemployed, I have no income, but I'll be OK,' she said. Jacobs says he wants people to find the right job and team culture match through a 'more human experience — a bit like a dating app but without the heartbreak of ghosting'. Young people have also been taking to social media to share their frustrations.
Forbes
10-06-2025
- General
- Forbes
3 Reasons Why We ‘Ghost' And ‘Breadcrumb' Each Other, By A Psychologist
New research reveals the surprising reasons why 'ghosting' and 'breadcrumbing' are such commonplace ... More tactics in the online dating world. Swiping, scrolling and messaging have all but replaced courtship in today's dating scene. While these tools certainly make it easier than ever for us to connect with potential partners, they've also made it just as easy for us to disappear. 'Ghosting' — abruptly cutting off all communication with a potential partner without any explanation — has become unfortunately commonplace in modern dating. So has 'breadcrumbing,' the act of sending lukewarm, inconsistent signals of romantic interest just to keep someone emotionally led on, but with no real intention of pursuing a relationship. Both of these behaviors have the exact same result: they leave those on the receiving end hurt, confused and emotionally destabilized. Yet, somehow, despite how painful it is to experience these behaviors, many people still admit to doing them anyway. A February 2025 study published in Deviant Behavior offers us newfound insight into why this might be the case. Researchers Alexandra Cobzeanu and Cornelia Măirean sought to pinpoint the psychological and experiential factors that make people more likely to ghost or breadcrumb others. The results are as revealing as they are upsetting. Here are three of the study's major findings. Cobzeanu and Măirean's study involved 578 participants from Romania, all between the ages of 18 and 27. By means of a web-based survey, they found that people who had previously experienced ghosting or breadcrumbing were significantly more likely to engage in those same behaviors themselves. This means, statistically speaking, that if you've been ghosted or breadcrumbed before, you're much more likely to do it to someone else. This might seem incredibly counterintuitive. If we know how painful it feels to be treated in these ways, why would we be more likely to inflict that same hurt on someone else? Shouldn't firsthand experience lead to more empathy, not less? But as Cobzeanu and Măirean explained in an interview with PsyPost, 'These findings echo the Cycle of Violence theory, suggesting a potential cycle of negative online behaviors where victims may become perpetrators.' As research from the Journal of Human Rights explains, the Cycle of Violence theory is typically applicable in contexts of domestic abuse, gang violence or bullying. In the simplest of terms, it suggests that people who experience harm may unconsciously repeat similar patterns. This pattern of repetition doesn't necessarily mean that victims become perpetrators purely out of cruelty. Rather, it's likely because they internalize their experience of harm as something that's normal in order to make sense of it. In the context of digital dating, this means that ghosting and breadcrumbing may start to feel like the best way to cope with the experience of those very same behaviors. If someone has been repeatedly ghosted by others, they may stop seeing it as cruel altogether. Instead, they start viewing it as an accepted (or perhaps even efficient) way to end things. Similarly, a person who's been breadcrumbed might opt for similar tactics to preserve the sense of power they may have lost when on the receiving end. Or, it may simply serve as an effective way to avoid emotional vulnerability, since they may well still be raw from their own experience of breadcrumbing. This doesn't make the behavior normal or acceptable in any way. However, it does mean that these behaviors likely aren't isolated acts of inconsideration. In reality, the research suggests that they're symptoms of the larger emotional economy we're living in — in which empathy becomes more and more rare with enough exposure to emotional detachment. The second major predicting factor identified in the study was moral disengagement. Simply put, it refers to the mental gymnastics people perform to justify behavior that they know, on some level, is morally wrong. Cobzeanu and Măirean found that moral disengagement was a strong predictor of breadcrumbing and, albeit to a lesser extent, ghosting. This finding echoes much of what we already know about dark personalities in the context of modern dating. In 2022, I interviewed Miguel Clemente, who studied exactly that. He explained to me that the theory of moral disengagement 'seeks to answer the question of how it is possible that, in some specific moments in their lives, amiable, well-socialized and respectful people are capable of committing inhumane, truly cruel acts.' As Clemente suggests, moral disengagement doesn't always lead to cruelty in the traditional sense of the word. But, it does create space for behaviors that place self-interest above the well-being of others. Breadcrumbing, objectively, is a form of emotional manipulation. In this sense, moral disengagement shields your self-concept from the guilt that usually arises when knowingly manipulating someone else. Breadcrumbers probably try to convince themselves that they're 'just being friendly,' or 'keeping things casual' — despite the fact that they can clearly tell how seriously emotionally invested the other person is. In the case of ghosting, moral disengagement aids and abets the formation of rationalizations. Ghosters will tell themselves, 'We only went on a few dates,' and that, 'It's not that deep.' These self-affirmations only serve as blinders that shield their eyes from the reality of their choices, even when they're fully aware of just how cruel their silence is. The real danger of moral disengagement in these contexts is that it severs us from the human impact of our choices. In turn, we begin treating emotional interactions as logistical inconveniences — something we can manage, minimize or ignore — rather than genuine relationships that carry weight and consequence. The final psychological factor Cobzeanu and Măirean identified was toxic disinhibition: the tendency for people to behave in more impulsive, aggressive or emotionally detached ways in digital spaces than they would in person. The study found that, once again, this trait strongly predicted breadcrumbing, and was also associated with ghosting behaviors. Toxic disinhibition thrives in environments where facial expressions, vocal tone and immediate feedback aren't required (which is to say, essentially all of modern online dating). When communicating through screens and keyboards, you likely aren't regulating your empathy and self-restraint in the same ways you normally would in person. In other words, without the presence of another living, feeling human being in front of us, it's much easier to dehumanize — or, at least, detach from — the emotional consequences of our actions. In breadcrumbing, toxic disinhibition makes it easier to use people as a source of ego boosts or entertainment, rather than as a real person with real needs and feelings. Sending a flirty message here and there, just enough to keep them on the hook, may just feel 'playful' or 'harmless.' From their side of the screen, it's much easier to push aside the thought of the emotional toll taking place on the other. Ghosting, too, can be seen as much less problematic in online environments than it would in real life. Through apps and texts, disappearing without a trace feels more like closing a browser tab than ending a relationship. But, in the back of their mind, ghosters are acutely aware of the emotional reality of what they're doing. As such, toxic online disinhibition dulls the natural and necessary discomfort we'd feel if we had to walk away from someone face-to-face. It's replaced instead with numbness, indifference or, in some cases, nothing. Worst of all, online dating is largely fast-paced and low-stakes by design. People can fall into these patterns without much reflection at all. It might not always be malicious, but it's definitely not benign either. Repeated toxic online dating behaviors are often linked to machiavellianism. Take this science-backed test to find out if you show any of the associated traits: Machiavellianism Scale
