TV and set-top box browsers tend to be slow and fiddly to use from a TV remote. (And often running on underpowered hardware).

If this was half the price, I might be interested. But if I wanted a coffee maker with open source control, I'd probably just hack an existing cheaper product. And I'm someone who absolutely loves assembling stuff from kits!

Heck, I'd be surprised if someone hasn't already got Doom running on a Sage.

This fascinated me when SD was first released, so I tested a whole bunch of scenarios. While it's quite easy to find situations that don't provide accurate results and produce all manner of glitches (some of which you can use to detect some SD-produced images), the results are nearly always convincing at a quick glance.

The phone doesn't need to broadcast anything to control the drone directly. The phone talks to the remote control unit, which is what broadcasts signals to control the drone. You don't need wifi or mobile internet, or even bluetooth to fly a DJI drone (the phone connects by cable to the remote control unit).

(Actually, that's not 100% true -- if you're in a locked zone that requires permission to fly (such as near airfields or other protected sites), you will need internet access to start your flight and unlock the zone using your DJI account. Otherwise the drone may refuse to fly into restricted zones.)

You don't even need the phone at all -- the remote unit is quite capable of controlling the drone in flight with the phone switched off.

If you want temporal locality, use ULIDs instead.

The brain is known to make use of such cues to gauge depth, and it's used in several optical illusions. (You can even make use of this principle with flash photography techniques to create approximate depth maps for surfaces. It's quite effective.)

I would argue that a model based on close distances of stacked items (e.g. stack bits of card or paper) is generally a better model than one based on large outdoor spaces, as it is a closer analogy in most situations. (Reading on-screen being reading off a relatively-close surface.)

But both can work. Look at screenshots of a game such as Spelunky: dark backgrounds, light foreground objects. The eye is drawn to the lighter surfaces and can ignore the darker background. But if the background was a distant landscape (e.g. Rastan -- don't know why that was my first thought... showing my age!), rather than a relatively close cave wall, your approach of desaturated lighter backgrounds might work just as well, as it would be more realistic. And at night, the opposite would be true.

UnrealScript has long been dropped in favour of C++, but I'm pretty sure Unreal Engine wouldn't exist today, or would be a very different beast, if it hadn't been for UnrealScript and the Unreal Editor being bundled with the original Unreal and its sequels/follow-ups, and Tim's personal interest and research into how programming languages might improve game development, in much the same way that Jonathan Blow is doing now.

Can I assume your use of the phrase "this person" means you are unfamiliar with Mr Blow, and his track record in game development? You might want to look him up -- he's an interesting character and has developed some interesting and influential games.

If the trademark owner discovers this, they would be legally obliged to defend their trademark if they want to keep it.

JVC/Kenwood has previously successfully defended their mark when used in artworks/apparel (which are not in the same domains).