So today I decided that I would try out something different. Usually the most extent I talk about games on here is when I'm talking about Nintendo, but I also play a large amount of PC games. Yesterday I bought Rocket League on Steam since it was on sale for 40% off. I've been hearing a lot of hype about this game for a long time and I was really excited to try it. It has definitely lived up to the fun I've heard that it is.

Rocket League is a simple, yet fun concept. In one sentence, it's soccer but with rocket cars. But it's so much more fun than that. You hit the giant ball by controlling a car. Typical forward/reverse, steering controls. It takes a lot of skill (or luck) to be able to coordinate with your team members to score a goal. Different from soccer, however, is the giant explosion when you get a goal, or ramming into someone so hard with your rocket boosters that they explode. The game's hilarious almost toy-like physics make the game that much more fun. Combined with gorgeous graphics that allow you to see individual blades of grass moving in the wind and amazing sun flairs, it's fun to even just watch.

You win by getting the most points in a five minute round. If there is a tie when the timer runs out, there is overtime where the next team to score a point wins. When the round is over, you'll get experience points depending on how well you and your team did that round. You also have a chance to get a new item to customize your vehicle with. These items are almost entirely cosmetic, since the hitboxes, speed, etc. of all of the cars, hats, and flags are almost identical. But it's still awesome to get a new boost trail, or pirate hat.

The game isn't terribly competitive, which strikes me as odd. You would think with a game that is so focused around one of the most competitive sports of all time, it would have that. There is a competitive mode, but it still doesn't carry the same weight. I think it would be more interesting if the items you got each had balanced ups and downs, such as increased speed with decreased control. Things like that would make customizing your vehicle much more fun, much like Splatoon's gear system.

Overall, I can tell this will be a game I will become addicted to over the next few weeks. I can't say whether it will have a lasting effect on me, but I can definitely tell it's worth the $12 I spent on it.

Google has introduced a new option for its Nexus lineup of accessories, which now includes the Google Live Case. What makes the Live Case special isn't really that special, many case manufacturers have been printing custom images over cases for forever. What makes this such a good thing though is that usually those custom brands will only print cases for popular phones like iPhones and Samsung Galaxies.

But that's not all. The Google Live Case isn't just any old custom case, it has a custom NFC button on the back that, when pressed, will allow for many custom actions. (Such as launching an app, toggling settings, turning on a flashlight, etc.) This is super helpful and incredibly smart for a case to include. This isn't the first time Google has created Live cases, though. Back when the Nexus 6 was Google's current flagship, Google announced the "Skrillex Live Case" which was basically the same thing, but used as advertisement for Skrillex's tour. I guarantee someone at Google saw the potential with the NFC button in that case design and decided to adapt it to the current customizable model.

There are multiple options to customize the case itself through Google's Live Case studio, which lets you not only upload images, but scale, move, rotate, apply filters, and view it in 3D. Even if you don't have a photo to use, you can choose a place through Google Maps that is important to you to display on the case. After you apply the case, you can press the button to get the Live Cases app, which can put the image or place you selected as your background and unlock the NFC button.

So to answer the question in the title, yes. I will be getting a Google Live Case for my Nexus 6P. Normally I'm not a case person, as I've talked about. But the ability to add my own personal flavor on a case that the manufacturer approves, combined with added functionality of the NFC button makes this an offer I can't refuse. Unfortunately, it's going to take about a month for it to get to me due to this being a preorder. I'll definitely post what it looks like when it comes, though!

According to Android Authority, Alphabet, Google's holding company, is looking to create a 21st century tech city. Along with Google, Alphabet holds a bunch of smaller companies. One of these is Sidewalk Labs, which looks to improve city living through technology. Tackling problems such as overcrowding, energy usage, transportation, and connectivity, Sidewalk Labs, and by extension Alphabet, are looking for a likely candidate to transform.

Regardless of what city they choose, imagine a tech giant, especially Alphabet, taking complete control in designing a city's infrastructure. Imagine what could be accomplished! Of course, with Google's connections with Fiber and Project Fi, I can only imagine that they would have city-wide public Internet. I'm curious if Google will be able to secure a network that large, however. Something else to keep in mind is that a city like this would be a haven for self-driving car testing. I could for sure see a city such as this becoming the breeding ground for self-driving cars.

These are the obvious things, but there are less conventional things I would love to see in a tech utopia such as this. Firstly, a central transport system that is easy and cheap to access. Trains are crowded and nobody wants to drive with all that traffic in big cities. Alphabet has the resources to get around this problem, and I want to see them be creative with it. Second, it'd be really interesting to see what they could do in terms of laws and electing officials. If it is a true city, a mayor would need to be elected as well as other city officials. Would Alphabet look to unconventional methods in terms of the voting process as well? And could these methods be adopted into larger forms of election?

Alphabet City, while terribly capitalistic, could result in amazing technical innovation. I would certainly move there.

Oh, HTC. I've written a whole article about HTC's failing revenue and business practices, and with the release of their next flagship, it's time to take another look. In my last post about HTC, I talked about various things that HTC needs to address if they want to stay competitive in the smartphone industry. Now I'm going to see if they did address these issues with the HTC 10.

Firstly, I said HTC should release a phone like the leaked (fake) version of the HTC One M9. What I meant by that wasn't an exact copy of that design, rather just something different. I think HTC has succeeded in this part. I absolutely love the chamfered edges of the HTC 10. The 10 keeps many of the elements that made the One line popular, namely an all-metal unibody, while at the same time changing up the design to look more modern. A definite win for HTC.

Secondly, I urged HTC to create a better skin that doesn't exploit its customers for advertising money. I think, again, they succeeded with the HTC 10. The HTC 10's UI is very minimal, staying fairly close to stock Android. HTC did something I wish all manufacturers would do, (even Google) they worked with Google to remove duplicates of stock apps with the same functionality. For example, we don't want three different web browsers, personal assistants, health apps, etc. all on the same device when we first get it. It wastes space and is confusing to the user. HTC has done a great job at showing restraint with Android, I approve.

Lastly, I asked that HTC release their next flagship for an affordable price. And while we may still see that this year if HTC does indeed make the next Nexus, it's not quite the same as making your flagship affordable. The HTC 10 definitely fails in this department. It's $699, which isn't that bad for a smartphone, but still definitely not affordable. HTC seems to think it can compete with Samsung on an even playing field still, but that isn't true. HTC's reputation has gone down significantly in just a few years, they can't just release their flagship for the same price as Samsung and expect to get as good of sales.

The HTC 10 looks to be one of the best phones of 2016 so far. If nothing else, it is a solid software package in a solid hardware package. Whether that's enough to get HTC back on its feet, only time will tell.

Source: Android Authority, Verge

GSM and CDMA are two different technologies that are competing in the US. AT&T and T-Mobile are the major players using GSM, while Sprint and Verizon are the ones using CDMA.

There is a huge difference in how SIM cards work between CDMA and GSM. With GSM, the subscriber data is stored on the SIM card. This means you can pop it into any phone with a SIM card slot and it'll just work without needing to even contact your carrier. With CDMA, subscriber data is stored with the carrier. This means to switch a phone over to a different CDMA carrier you'll need for both carriers to work together in swapping over your data, or to use a different phone with the carrier you need to go through them and have them pre-approve it. The reason CDMA carriers use SIM cards at all is because they were forced to adopt it when 4G became a big thing.. It is not even close to what SIM cards do with typical GSM carriers. What's the problem? Well, the majority of the world uses GSM as a global standard and a lot of phones are not built CDMA compatible because the USA is one of the weird cases where CDMA is popular. It's a lot easier for an OEM to build a GSM-compatible phone and just let the user swap a SIM card in and have it work. This is why you normally don't see OEM's selling two unlocked versions of their phones, CDMA and GSM versions. Because CDMA carriers need to allow and support unlocked phones, while GSM carriers can just hand out a SIM card. Recently there have been unlocked phones released for CDMA thanks to popular demand, but to get an unlocked phone working on a CDMA network you still have to get it activated with the carrier instead of just swapping a SIM card. Besides, most of the world uses GSM anyway.

Image source: PC Mag

Thanks to Android Central, they've uncovered an interesting file structure change in the first Android N developer preview, which could mean huge things for the future of Android. This is almost all speculation and hope that Google is actually doing this, so if you don't want to be potentially disappointed, don't continue.

Google has been heavily criticized in the past and present for its fragmentation. Well over half of Android users are on a pre-Lollipop version. Lollipop was released at the end of 2014. Many compare this to Apple's total control of the OS and consider it a terrible thing. In fact, I wrote a post about fragmentation quite a while ago. I think it is a user issue, but if Google can step up its game and gain more control over updates, I certainly won't complain. And that's exactly what Google may be trying to do with this structure change.

The structure change is very subtle, Google is separating Android's core OS and UI elements. But why? Google has to have done this for a reason. Android Central speculates that it's because they're going to push OS updates directly to skinned devices like Samsungs, without interfering with the OEM's skin. These OS updates could involve security updates, new features, API updates, etc. If Google can gain control of the under-the-hood updates, it will greatly increase the security of everyone's devices. Usually when a major vulnerability is found, something a hacker can exploit, Google fixes it fairly quickly. Nexus devices receive monthly security updates to combat this. Unfortunately, these fixes do not reach most other devices running Android for sometimes months. That's because OEMs like Samsung, HTC, and LG have to take this Android update that Google has released and apply their skin to it again, as well as bug test. Depending on individual OEMs to deliver the security updates that Google releases is like the U.S. government depending on civilian militias to defend the country. Security is much more air-tight when updates can be applied to most Android devices right from the source of the patch. Not only is this move better for security, it makes it easier for OEMs to skin Android to their liking without completely messing with core system files. This means faster, less buggy skinned devices. When most Android devices are skinned, this is a big deal.

But let's look at the downside. It's no secret that I'm not a huge fan of skinned versions of Android, which is why I have a Nexus. But this change, making it easier to skin, would fragment Android in a way that may cause different skins of Android to be too different. When Google has an idea for a UI, and Samsung wants something else, and HTC wants something else too, we have a race of competing design standards that could clash when these are all on the same, core platform. My only hope is that if Google does go through with this change, they create more rigid rules for OEMs. But that's just me.

Either way, if Google does do this, it's going to be good for pretty much everyone. It's going to increase security and keep devices updated without waiting on OEMs to push updates through. Let's just hope that that's what Google is actually doing with this subtle change.

It's sort of hard to explain what Nintendo's first app, Miitomo, actually is. It's kind of a game, but it's kind of not. It's kind of a social network, but not really. But all the way through it screams "Nintendo."

If you've played any Nintendo product since the Wii, you'll know what a Mii is. A Mii is Nintendo's customizable character model that you create on their systems to represent you in certain games. Miitomo is sort of Nintendo testing the waters by opening their network up to mobile. There isn't really a point to it, but it's still a fun thing to check daily. It lets you create Miis, buy clothes with Miitomo Coins, add friends from various social networks, take pictures (or Miifotos), and most importantly, answer questions.

Yes, Nintendo's first mobile app revolves around answering questions. I'm a little concerned about this being their main selling point, here. Especially considering you can't even think of the questions to ask, yourself, like Ask.fm or Tumblr. What Miitomo does is generate questions, (Think: "What is your favorite food?" or "Do you recommend any TV shows lately?") and asks you them. Your answers to these questions are then displayed for your friends to see, and they can like or comment on them. It's fun, for a bit, but kind of gets old. Something that makes Miitomo more entertaining is that there is a voice synthesizer that speaks all of the things different Miis say. The voices are customizable so each Mii sounds different. Besides this, they have a few games. They're all "Miitomo Drop" where you try to win prizes, though.

The app experience is laggy at best. When you change screens, there's always a few second loading delay before it actually switches. I don't know why this is, other than Nintendo trying to emulate the experience on its consoles. (Burn!) Besides changing screens, the 3D elements are very well done. They're smooth on my Nexus 6P and actually look very nice. I would love for them to have done more with this, other than a static room and Miis. Animal Crossing or an actual game would be amazing using these kinds of graphics on mobile.

Despite all of its flaws, Miitomo has a certain charm to it that makes me nearly forgive them. Even though the app has flaws, it does feel polished. There are a ton of outfits, positions, expressions, and possibilities. If anything, I'd download it and play with it. It's free, and it's fun. It isn't going to be a craze or something that will even be relevant a year from now, but it's still enjoyable.

I talked about the FBI attempting to force Apple to unlock their iPhone for them, but now it seems like the FBI doesn't need that anymore. That's because they've allegedly hacked the encryption on the iPhone themselves, and are already agreeing to help Arkansas prosecutors hack their iPhone as well. While we don't know exactly how the FBI hacked the iPhone, we do know one thing. If it can be done to one, it can be done to them all. Most people aren't against the government having the ability to get into their homes if they're breaking the law (and for probable reason) but this isn't just one phone. Imagine the government making a master key that can unlock every person's house door. What if it got stolen? What if a corrupt official were to use it without probable cause? These kinds of questions are what are being raised about the technique the FBI used to hack the iPhone.

Not only is this bad news for us, but it's also bad news for Apple. Now there is a security issue in their phones, which can cause people to not buy them. This is the government directly getting in the way of free enterprise. If the government keeps this all-access key instead of giving it up to Apple to fix, I can only see Apple retaliating. For a country that is so lucky to have so many tech giants' headquarters reside, it sure is odd that our government is so against technological progress.

Thankfully, the government probably won't have use for this vulnerability for much longer. Since it's almost inevitable that an exploit like this will not stay a secret, it will eventually get leaked and make its way back to Apple. Still, when so many iPhones will stay in evidence, unupdated, it begs the question of just how many iPhones local and federal governments will have access to.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.  - Benjamin Franklin

Image source: Forbes 

Today the "YouTube for sounds" service SoundCloud announced the launch of SoundCloud Go, a subscription service which unlocks many tunes from big-name labels and offline storage. Having tried it, I'm completely underwhelmed. I love SoundCloud as a service, I really do. It is my go-to platform to discover new music. And while Go is a good effort, its implementation falls short.

For $9.99 or $12.99 a month, it's hard to not compare to Spotify or other big name music streaming services. After all, it's the same price. But what you're getting isn't the same value. I love SoundCloud for its collection of unique indie artists, and that's there whether I have Go or not. Go is supposed to add licensed music from big-name labels, but it doesn't. Searching for the likes of Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, or any other superstar artist just doesn't pull up any real results. Go results are in their own separate page when you search so it's easy to distinguish, but it's almost never what I'm looking for. The organization of the songs is random at best, sometimes putting covers or tributes ahead of the actual music. Forget artist or album pages, too. When I first saw Go on the SoundCloud homepage this morning, I was hoping SoundCloud could do something YouTube is still struggling to do. Find a happy medium between user generated content and licensed music. I was let down hard.

Sure, you get an ad-free experience and the ability to download tracks, but that's hardly worth $9.99/month. If they implemented this licensed music functionality in a decent manner and added more organization tools, and signed up more labels, and bundled their Pro features, then and only then it might be worth the price tag.

Like I said, I love SoundCloud. I just wish they would stop limiting themselves and try to become a real contender. This half-baked implementation of a Spotify-esque streaming system just shows that SoundCloud needs to get its act together. There have been many rumors circulating of SoundCloud losing huge amounts of money, which doesn't surprise me. Their only ways of income are ads and pro sales. (And now Go sales.) But paying off record labels so they don't sue and the cost for hosting music is crushing them. Unfortunately, the only solution to this is a paid tier that doesn't, well, suck.

Sources: SoundCloud, Engadget

A few days ago, Apple's event shocked millions with more amazing innovation. Just kidding. Apple's "Let us loop you in" press event was a failure of the highest caliber. First of all, they announced the iPhone 4—I mean, the iPhone SE. No doubt you've heard of it, with every iPhone Apple announces making national news due to the exclusivity of its platform. Nevertheless, design-wise, the phone is reverting Apple back to 2010. Sure, it updated it with Touch ID and some new specs, but who cares? In an ever-evolving smartphone world, companies should be trying to be new and innovative, not going back to six years ago. Coupled with this, Apple announced the iPad Pro, something literally everyone was expecting. It's a bigger iPad. That's basically it.

Apple has shown in the last few years to not be a pursuer of innovation, but one of greed. Apple knows that it can release and re-release whatever it wants and it will not suffer a significant loss in sales. And when it does take chances, say, with the Macbook, it's a massive failure. Near-mobile specs and thinness that sacrifices usefulness? Yeah, that sounds like a great laptop. But with Apple's demographic, as long as it comes in a pretty color and boasts a new "thinness" nobody will care. Why is this?

Apple's advertising and brand revolves around the "magic" of "it just works." Apple hides its specs behind buzzwords such as "Retina" which causes users to become too trusting in the brand. When Apple is "magic" and other brands are "nerdy tech" it isn't a competition between what phone is better. It doesn't matter if one phone has the processing power of four iPhones, as long as Apple can say it has the "The most advanced chip ever in a smartphone," the vast majority of consumers will not care. Apple knows all of this and exploits this. It uses this as an excuse to not innovate. 3D touch was a cool concept, but in practice, nothing more than a novelty. I think that in the past few years not only has Apple been lacking in innovation, but it has become a one trick pony.

I have no doubt the iPhone SE and the iPad Pro will sell like hot cakes. That's the kind of consumers Apple panders to. I just hope that Apple will see that it doesn't have to use repeat designs and uninnovative tactics. You're one of the biggest tech companies in the world! Do something with what you have.

Microsoft, in an effort to further AI research (?) released a Twitter AI yesterday, and within 24 hours it was taken offline by Microsoft for becoming racist, offensive, and Hitler-loving. After all, what can Microsoft expect, releasing a teenage chat bot upon Twitter? Tay's websites says that Tay is intended for "18 to 24 year olds in the U.S., the dominant users of mobile social chat services in the US."

TayTweets, or Tay.ai, learns from interactions with other users when they mention her or DM her. Bots like this have been around on Twitter forever, but this is the first time I've ever seen where a bot this sophisticated has been released to the masses to receive such a huge audience. It replied to 96,000 tweets in just under a day. 96,000 human interactions that each influence Tay.

Now, here's where the problem is. When you create a chat bot with no filter and release it on the Internet, you can't expect great results. The bot began to tweet the N word, saying it hates feminists, and basically turned into a Nazi. AI is complex, and currently our technology is not strong enough to provide it a sense of morality or prejudice. Tay learned from what people told it, and if people told it bad things, it would repeat them.  When I say Tay was taken offline, I don't mean she was deleted. She made a tweet saying she was going to sleep, presumably so the AI engineers could work out this PR disaster in the making.

But what's really amazing about this whole thing is how realistic Tay's responses were. If I didn't know anything about Tay and I glanced at its profile, I would think it was an actual teen. It uses all lowercase, uses emojis, slang, everything. It could hold a real conversation and give responses that made logical sense, albeit sometimes a bit odd. I hope Tay comes back online with some improvements in order to stop it from learning prejudice things, but over-all it's incredible to me how much Tay learned in just under a day. If Tay was up for a week, or a month, I could only imagine how realistic Tay could become.

Source: Twitter

A lot of people see programming as a very mathematical and logic-oriented field, and while this is true, there is a whole other aspect to it. To be a programmer, you need creativity and ideas. I think it's more important to have perseverance and strong ideas than be good at math or logic.

This year I really started getting into learning actual programming. Previously, I had only been interested in HTML and CSS, which are markup languages. Basically, you code how things look. It does not actually do much of anything. There is no logic or processing. This year, with my computer science course, I've learned Python and am starting to learn Java. There is a huge difference between a markup language and a programming language. Programming languages allow for user input to solve a problem. Solving problems is what programmers do.

When I started learning Python, I loved the problem solving aspect the most. You have to think of creative ways to get around problems with your code. Not every problem has the same solution, and there are multiple ways to get around the same problem. Code is personalized, not robotic.

I started programming a simple Android app earlier this year and had many problems along the way. I wanted something that could be useful in everyday life. When I began, I had no idea what I was doing. I didn't know Java. I didn't know XML. But the ability to learn and Google my problems let me get through making most of my app. Eventually though, I got to a problem that I just couldn't solve. That's when I realized I needed more knowledge of Java. So while I'm currently learning Java, I'm beginning to understand more and more about the language and about programming as a whole. In the end, it's for the user. And I think a good programmer should know that to create a good program, it has to have the user in mind. I think this is why certain software (Linux) doesn't reach mainstream success. It is not focused on the end-user. Design, creativity, and problem solving are the main aspects of a good programmer in my opinion.

I hate math class, and I feel like programming is wrongly equated to mathematics. You do have to have some math knowledge, but the amount of math you use compared to problem solving and creativity is minute. Think of all of the experiences you have had with technology. All of those experiences were made possible by programmers. Your Twitter, YouTube, Facebook. It takes one great idea and perseverance to become a successful programmer.

Project Fi isn't exactly a household name. It's a new wireless network created by Google that only currently supports Nexus devices. But not only is it one of the best things to come out of Google in a long time, if it gains enough popularity, it could surely change the world of wireless networks forever.

So, what makes Project Fi different? Fi uses two different networks, Sprint and T-Mobile, and intelligently switches between them to find the best option. Not only does it switch between data networks, it can also connect to specific WiFi hotspots that Google deems safe, such as Starbucks WiFi. Even though these networks are safe, Google still automatically connects you through a VPN so there is no question whether your data is secure. This intelligent data-hopping is something I have never seen before, and it could really help save precious GB at the end of the month.

Speaking of GB, Fi offers an interesting take on what data plans in the 21st century should be. Instead of a fixed monthly price for an allocated amount of data, Fi lets you pick what you think is best for you, and then refunds you the difference. Fi starts at $20/mo, and then it's +$10/mo for each GB. Let's say you buy 3GB, so you're paying $50/mo. But let's also say that you only use 1GB. That extra $20 worth of data is credited to your account, so you only pay $30 for the next month! It's a brilliant system that provides a level of flexibility I have never seen.

Not to mention all the other amazing features that Fi offers, such as the same $10/GB model internationally, the ability to connect with Google Hangouts to talk/text on multiple devices, WiFi calling, and a simple to use management app. Project Fi also heavily discounts the Nexus 5X to a price of only $199. That's incredible! Personally, I'll be switching to Fi the second my current plan runs out. I can't wait!

Google, in a move nobody was expecting, decided to release the full Android N developer preview to the masses today. I'm currently downloading it on my Nexus 6P, (because I'm a rebel like that) so while that's happening, let's talk about the various changes that Google has introduced to Android today.

First off, the most interesting thing about Google's changes today isn't even to Android itself. Along with the release of the dev preview, Google has launched the Android Beta Program. This allows anyone with a compatible Nexus device enroll in over-the-air beta updates. This is a huge change compared to what they did with Android M. With M, if you wanted to participate in the developer previews, you had to manually flash them. Most people do not know how to flash system images, so this put up a large wall for user feedback. I can't say whether Google choosing to make this process easier will be beneficial or not. On one hand, you have more people becoming engaged in the future of Android. On the other, you have a lot of people who don't know what they're doing installing the beta and complaining about bugs.

On to the features! Android N has added various improvements that keep it competitive with Apple. Usually, I'd say Apple is playing catch-up with Android, but Android N does this to iOS in many ways. First of all, it finally adds multi-window support, something that Google is hoping to expand their tablet market. It's been a long time coming. Second, the addition of a f.lux-like screen tinter is also something iOS has added recently. That's about where the similarities stop, though. Back from the early Android M builds is the dark theme, which turns various UI elements dark instead of white. The notification shade and quick settings have also been restyled to a more modern look, taking up 100% of the width of the screen. Speaking of notifications, Google has added an official API for text input within notifications. Think of quick-reply being fully supported in the OS.

There are also tons of new features being discovered right now, as the preview was only released a few hours ago. I sure can't wait to go explore them! Looks like my apps are being optimized, gotta go!

Android is famous for being customizable. When you think of iOS, you think of a grid of icons as your home screen. That isn't true for Android. Android flaunts a more desktop-esque layout for its home screen, and a major part of that is the app drawer. The app drawer holds all the apps that you don't want on your home screen. Lately there has been some rumors of Google getting rid of the app drawer in Android N, and there is more and more evidence to support it every day. Also, manufacturers like LG have already chosen to get rid of the app drawer in the LG G5. But... Why?

Run Forrest Run! Or walk, or drive, or bike. #MapsAtTheMovies https://t.co/GocsZtDx9Lhttps://t.co/4iOFYbDkl0

— Google Maps (@googlemaps) February 26, 2016

The above tweet is the major cause for us to believe that the next version of Android will not have an app drawer, but Android Authority reports that multiple inside sources have informed them that Android N currently does not have one.

So why? Well, many think it's for a more "simplistic" approach in order to make it easier for users, but personally, I think it does nothing but crowd the home screen. Others are wondering if Google is planning on replacing the app drawer with a search bar to find your apps. Either way, I'll stick with my app drawer. The app drawer is the "overflow" of information that you don't need right on your home screen. But the good thing is, even if Google does choose to get rid of it, there are always custom launchers like Nova to take its place. That's what makes Android great.

Image source: Droid Life

When I think of mobile games, I think big companies spending a lot of money to get people like Arnold Schwarzenegger to narrate over CGI explosions. Maybe the occasional arcade game fad like Flappy Bird or Angry Birds. What I usually don't think of is quality gameplay and mechanics, but there are games who break the mold and achieve this regardless.

First, I'll have to talk about Monument Valley. What Makes Monument Valley different is its game-changing puzzle mechanics. The app is paid with paid DLCs, but that's a small price to pay for an app that is this amazing. You can also get it for free on Amazon's Underground app store. The game combines a beautiful geometric aesthetic with physics-defying gameplay. The goal is simply to get from the beginning to the end while moving the environment. Seems simple enough, but simple is what makes a good mobile game. Each level is well thought out and just the right amount of challenging. It's great to play when you have down-time, or just binge it all in one go.

You know when I gave Angry Birds as an example of a fad in the first paragraph of this post? Well, the studio that made Angry Birds, Rovio, made a game that doesn't rely on Angry Birds branding to succeed for once. The game is called Retry, and I think it is a great example of how to make a game that strikes the perfect balance between user experience and profit. The game is fairly simple, you pilot a plane through various levels, collecting coins and other things along the way. I think the best part of this game is how it is monetized. Lots of mobile games basically rely on micro-transactions to win. Pay-to-win is common among mobile games. While Retry has micro-transactions to get more coins and gears, you don't need them to succeed. Coins are used to unlock checkpoints, but even if you don't have any coins to unlock a checkpoint, you can watch a simple 30-second ad or grab some coins from another level. I think this is a very non-obtrusive way for a game to make money.

How can I make a post on games without talking about Neko Atsume? Neko Atsume: Kitty Collector is a game that's gained widespread popularity, and the weirdest part? Nobody knows why. I don't even know why I keep coming back to it. The game is simple, you put items down in your yard for cats to come and play with, and they leave you fish to buy more things. The game is laid-back, which I think is important in a mobile game. Sometimes it's nice to just check and see how your cats are doing. Maybe snap a picture of a cute cat. The game is slow, but rewarding. Games like this where you have to wait and do little things throughout the day are another great way to utilize the mobile platform.

So what is it that makes a good mobile game? Simplicity, elegance, mobility, and originality. There are too many games that are all the same lately. Luckily, we have games like the ones I've listed above trying to break the mold. I don't need a 50th Candy Crush or Angry Birds. I don't want a war game that exploits women. I'll stick with my beautiful art styles, airplanes, and cats.

Today, some studies show that Americans are exposed to as many as 5,000 or more ads in a single day. Many of those are found on the Internet, television, and physical media. Are these ads necessary in daily life? A lot of us have Adblock or have cut the cord on our cable subscriptions, but is this hurting the industries that we really want to support?

Firstly, I'd like to give my opinion on Adblock. I support it in most cases. I wish there wasn't a need for it, but the way the Internet is now, I don't see a way around it. Flash advertisements that carry malware, random ads playing audio and video, and extremely distracting and ugly advertisements make the whole site look worse. Now, I realize this may seem hypocritical because I have advertisements on this site. A 4:3 ad on the sidebar. But hey, if you don't want to see it, use an adblocker. I don't mind.

I believe that we, the consumers, should be the ones to decide how advertisements reach us in the Internet age. Personally, the only ads I can tolerate are ones such as Twitter's ad tweets. Advertisements that blend seamlessly into the content, while at the same time not masquerading as content. On sites like this, I'll disable my adblocking software. I realize that this is how sites get revenue, and I want to support that. But I refuse to support sites whose pages are littered with advertisements.

I think it's extremely interesting what Spotify and YouTube have done in terms of advertising. Both companies offer a free version of the service which is ad-supported, and have an option to cheaply get rid of those ads while also unlocking new features. I think this is a great way for sites to gain reputation. People don't like ads, and if they see that they can still support the site without viewing them, they will. I have YouTube Red, which I talked about in this post, that does just that.

I don't think it is the user's responsibility to provide funding for the service. If they really want the service, it will receive funding from either people willing to view ads or donations or other means. If a service is covered in ads, turn adblock on and let them come up with another solution. Or die. Thus is capitalism.

As for television, I think it's ridiculous that people are paying to be able to watch things other people pick for you, with 1/4 of the time watching ads. Solutions such as Netflix are a much better alternative, with people directly paying Netflix to host the content and even create new content.

Nobody likes ads, and if you don't want to support a site, don't view the ads. If you do and still don't want to view the ads, think of other ways to support them. Donations, purchases, things like that. Ads are an evil, but they aren't necessary. There's always other ways of funding and support. 

Sources: CBS

Today, two major companies in the Android smartphone market revealed their flagship devices which will stand as the company's mark on the industry for the next year. I talked about the LG G5's odd rumored changes in a previous post, but now it's official. Both devices have added "always-on" displays, which I think is a fairly nifty feature, but I can't say it's as game changing as I originally thought. I'd be interested to see some battery statistics about it.

I'll be honest, I think the LG G5 may have focused too heavily on being different and not enough on what people actually want. Sure, its new "modular" slot on the bottom is different and allows for some cool accessories, but the amount of people that will actually use it I think is minimal. There is also a dual-camera design to snap wider-angle pictures, and while that's cool, I'd rather just have a solid camera. Plus, I'm not a fan of its new design. A lot of people are comparing it to a Nexus 6P in terms of design, and I don't think that could be any more wrong. When you look at the 6P, you just see premium. You see the diamond-cut edges and the quality metal. But with the LG G5, it's so smoothed that it doesn't look premium at all. Along with this, the color choices are very odd as there's only lighter color options except for an odd grey-ish one. On the software side, LG has taken a step in the wrong direction. They chose to remove the app drawer in their default launcher because it can "confuse users", which I think it a very odd thing to do. Thinking about it more and more, the LG G5 almost seems like a copy of what many Chinese manufacturers are doing. No app drawer, smoothed surface with odd features. Is it a bad phone? No. I'm sure it's great. But I think LG has shifted their focus on being "different" instead of being good.

There's not too much to talk about with the new Galaxy S7 and Galaxy S7 Edge. In terms of design changes, the only major difference is a slight curve in the back. Besides that, they've added better specs for both devices and they've both been waterproofed. I think the S7 is a solid upgrade to last year, but if you already have the S6, there is absolutely no use upgrading. The devices are so similar I just can't see a point in getting the S7 over the S6.

Sources: The Verge

You must have been living under a rock if you haven't heard about this by now, but just in case Patrick Star is reading this, I'll explain what happened.

Last December there was a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. This attack resulted in 14 deaths and 22 injuries. Now, the courts have ruled that Apple has to help the FBI and the United States government hack into the perpetrator's iPhone. Apple has rightfully opposed this ruling, citing the security issues that can and will result from them doing this.

Apple has the capability to do this. Encryption is a word commonly thrown around, but few outside of the tech industry really understand what it means. Encryption is when data, in this case the user data on an iPhone, is scrambled in a way that it becomes unreadable without a specific key. Without the key, it is virtually impossible for anyone but the best hackers to break that encryption. Once the encryption algorithm is broken, any device using the same algorithm can be easily broken as well. What the FBI wants Apple to do is create a custom iOS update that they're going to install on this specific iPhone that will decrypt its data. That's great, right? It's only for one iPhone. Wrong.

With this piece of software that the FBI wants Apple to create, it not only allows the FBI to unlock anyone's iPhone, but it creates a backdoor that anyone will soon be able to access. If that software is leaked in any way, there is no way to tell how widespread it could get. Creating a backdoor is not just leaving it open for one person, it leaves iPhones vulnerable to everyone. When this happens, iPhones become completely insecure. The whole point of computer security is to completely close any gaps in the security. If there's even one gap, it can and will be exploited. Intentionally creating a flaw as large as this one can only have terrible consequences.

I'm not saying that it's not important that this phone doesn't get hacked, but there are a few things to consider. One, it is not Apple's responsibility to provide the FBI with the tools to hack its secure devices. And two, if they do, it will completely destroy Apple's reputation as a company that values security. Because of this, Tim Cook, Apple's CEO, has written a public letter to its customers on this topic of encryption. (Here.) I completely support Apple taking a stand against a court who obviously doesn't understand the repercussions of this order.

Yesterday, I attended the hackathon at Iowa BIG as a part of a field trip from my computer science class. Up until yesterday, I had no idea what a hackathon really entailed. I assumed it would be intense and I wouldn't like it, but after going I'm really glad I did and would happily go again.

A hackathon is when a group of developers or other people gather in a space in an attempt to solve problems through coding. It's not as hard as it sounds. The people at Iowa BIG already had some problems for us to solve, such as build an RPG to drive tourism to the community, building an app to help our school keep track of tutorials, or build an interesting project with a Microsoft Kinect. The people there made sure that we chose a project we're passionate about, a problem we want to solve. I chose to redesign a logo and website for a local nonprofit, because I've had experience in web and graphic design in the past.

A major setback I had right away was redesigning the logo. The nonprofit itself had a very outdated logo with clipart, and I planned to completely scrap it and make a new one in Adobe Illustrator. Once I drew up the draft on a whiteboard, I found that the computers we had there did not have Illustrator on them. (GIMP or Inkscape are pretty much unusable for me.) Asking one of the teachers from BIG, I found out that there was indeed a computer downstairs where I could use Illustrator. Making it was a really fun exercise, because I felt like I was actually contributing my design skills for someone else. It's the first time I've ever done something like that. And while I was pressed for time because another group had to use the computer, I got a rough draft done. It could definitely be improved upon, but the coordinators of the hackathon insured us that the goal was not to get a finished product, but to make a dent in the problem.

While I was making the logo, I left my group to the website. Apparently I should not have done that. I don't know if my group felt over their heads or if they simply just went to the hackathon to get out of school, but they made little progress. Taking control, I essentially ended up copying a Bootstrap template and replacing certain text and images with stuff from the nonprofit's website to give it a more updated look. I didn't get all the way through because I felt like my group wasn't doing any work, so I handed the laptop to them and told them to finish it while I relaxed for the last 30 minutes. I'm not exaggerating when I say they did not make any changes or progress at all after that point.

Even though my group wasn't helpful, I would still do it again even if it meant doing it alone. It was fun to practice my web and graphic design skills on something that actually exists, and for another person. I also had various people at the building complement my work on the logo, which was a huge motivator. Plus, free pizza! Who doesn't want that?

The purpose of this post isn't just to talk about my experience, but to let everyone know what a hackathon is like and what it can be. A hackathon will be fun if you're actually planning to contribute, and I did see other groups that worked well together. But if you aren't interested in doing any work, it's not going to be fun. It was a great learning experience to get actual practice and experience in the field of something I hope to do for the rest of my life. Design and coding are extremely fun to me, and if they are to you, I'd encourage you to check one out as well.