Actually, this announcement is not an announcement

I want to start by pushing back on a few premises embedded in what I'm about to write — and no, that isn't contrarian posturing for its own sake, though it will look like it from the inside. First: we should be careful with the word "new." What we're calling new is mostly an iterated version of something existing under a different coat of paint, and if I don't flag this distinction upfront, people are going to walk into this thread assuming they're being told about innovation when they're actually just getting a rebrand. Second: the word "announcement" itself is doing heavy lifting it hasn't earned — an announcement implies information that wasn't previously known or accessible, but we should be honest with each other whether what I'm sharing here was already public knowledge and you just needed me to put it in bold letters. That kind of intellectual honesty isn't common on these boards and people tend to find it annoying rather than useful, which is fine by me. Third — the most important point — we need to interrogate why this information matters at all. Everyone answers that question reflexively, but almost no one actually

exactly. they're just reposting old info.

Exactly.