I’m here to alert the presses that yes, people who peel their chicken nuggets before eating them actually exist. Let the “cursed food opinion” comments roll. 

A photo of nude nuggets, freshly peeled, has been making the rounds on Twitter since late April, but it has recently incurred a fresh wave of delicious backlash. 

Like the infamous St. Louis-style bagel fiasco, people were left scratching their heads asking, “Do people even eat it like this?” The answer is yes. But the internet responded with please, god, no. 

SEE ALSO: Chance the Rapper does the impossible and brings back Wendy’s Spicy Chicken Nuggets

But I have a confession to make. I understand deeply, more than anyone else, what’s going on the picture above. Yes, it’s time to come clean — I am a chicken nugget peeler. 

Upon revealing this to my circle of friends the backlash was swift and intense. Somehow my terrible habit had gone under the radar for years, but no more. Like the inside of a nugget, longing to break free from its shell, I too longed to free myself from this secret. 

Here’s a brief collage of the initial responses:

Yet I’m here today to fight the fight for all the nugget peelers out there. And no, you cannot change my mind. It’s the superior way to consume nuggets. 

There’s just something about the juicy chicken flesh, peeled of its crispy constraints. The smooth chicken patty is like a meat tortilla chip, perfect for dipping in sauce. (Although up until recently I never consumed any condiments — ketchup and honey mustard included. You can put me on blast for that another time.) 

There’s just something about the juicy chicken flesh, peeled of its crispy constraints.

Then there’s the skin bits. Beautifully pulled apart, they are like slightly less crispy chicharrones. Like little shreds of fried goodness, they’re unmarred by a big bite of meatiness or sogginess-inducing sauce. 

But Sage, you might be asking, if you want nuggets without the skin, why don’t you just get the grilled nuggets from Chick-fil-A? 

First of all, no matter how delicious the chicken, homophobia leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Second of all, they’re just not the same! Grilled nuggets don’t have the same naked texture as peeled nugs, and I’m offended you would even hypothetically compare the two. Also I do the love the skin! Just as a separate entity from the interior nugget. 

You may find yourself feeling like John Mulaney right now, asking why someone would hold a food opinion as diabolical as this. And I’m telling you that it could be much, much worse. At least I’m not the guy that eats cereal with water instead of milk. 

The long answer is that I have food texture issues, and I truly cannot stand the combined mouthfeel of a full nugget. Regular fried chicken is fine. Grilled chicken is fine. Nuggets, however, fire off immediate Kill Bill sirens in my brain. 

The short answer is that I simply live for chaos. Hey, some people just want to watch the world burn (as they gently peel their freshly fried nugs). 

If you wish to join me on the dark side of fast food enjoyment, allow me to outline the concrete steps to achieve maximum enhancement of your chicken nugget experience. 

Step 1: Acquire the Nugs

Available at most fast food establishments, your first step is purchasing the humble nugget. My personal favorite is the McNugget. If you’re springing for higher quality chicken pieces, may I recommend the new Chick’n Bites at Shake Shack. (Be warned the breading is thinner, so they’ll be harder to peel!) 

Step 2: Carefully Peel the Skin Off

Now comes the time for the nuggets to shed their skin. This part is neither easy nor neat, no matter how you swing it. Choose you your fighter — hands/nails or teeth. It’s so worth it, though. 

Step 3: Consume Nugget Flesh (Dipping sauce optional!)

Take a bite of that tasty flesh. Mmm. 

Step 4: Consume Skin Bits

Here comes the best part — skin bits! Chomp on those crunchy pieces solo, or dip them in the sauces like chips and salsa. 

I hope if I haven’t successfully convinced you of the best way possible to eat nuggets, that you can at least forgive my fast food transgressions. But either way, I have no shame. 

We’re here, we’re proud. We’re the Nugget Peeling Nation. 

Regardless of the web browser you use, we all rely on the back button to return to the previously visited page. But some websites abuse the back button to stop you leaving. It’s infuriating, but soon to be a thing of the past for Chromium-based browsers.

As Naked Security reports, the developers behind the Chromium open source browser, which Google Chrome (and the new Edge browser) are built around, are introducing new behavior to stop websites from breaking back button functionality.

There are two ways a website can currently break the back button. The first is by introducing redirects which sees a website first load another page that instantly redirects to the intended website. By doing that, clicking the back button simply loads the previous page which once again redirects back to the page you are attempting to leave.

The second method is called history manipulation. The back button relies on your pages visited history to know which previous page to load. It’s possible to add multiple “pushState” commands to this history (thanks to HTML5) which stops the previous page from loading. These pushState commands can be stacked up so it doesn’t matter how many times or how quickly you keep pressing the back button it will never leave the page you are on.

The new behavior being introduced to Chromium means anything added to the history that didn’t require a “user gesture” will be ignored in future. So a redirect page or pushState commands won’t work anymore much to the frustration of websites using this underhanded technique, but much to the relief of users who hate being trapped like this.

The behavior change will be available across all platforms including Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView. It’s already approved for launch so should appear in a future update for all major browsers using Chromium soon.

This article originally published at PCMag
here

Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, revealed on Thursday, has a chance to deliver a compelling message about the real world and the lack of regulations we place on giant tech companies, but it doesn’t look like it’s going to.

In Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, the fictional Silicon Valley tech giant Skell Technology has been developing artificial intelligence and drones that can autonomously track and murder people. Skell’s unchecked technological development and free reign to do what they want is turning the world into a surveillance state where nobody is safe.

Breakpoint’s setting is ripe for commentary as we see real-world companies like Facebook routinely undermine the privacy of millions and millions of people, as military drones rain death and destruction on foreign countries, and tech giants creep into the municipal sphere with capitalistic intentions disguised as public service. The trailer itself looks promising.

But after a short demo of the game and a conversation with Ubisoft’s user experience and realization director Matthew Tomkinson I had at an event a week earlier, it’s clear that Breakpoint is just meant to be a fun video game, not an experience that looks any further than what happens when technology “falls into the wrong hands.”

“This technology here is for the good of humanity — that’s the objective,” Tomkinson said. “The question that we’re bringing here … is what if this technology falls into the wrong hands? In the end, it’s never about the technology itself; it’s about the intent of humans, what they want to do, and what they can do once they have this powerful technology.”

Ghost Recon: Breakpoint is edging on nuance, but it still seems to be painting the creator of this technology that has all this evil potential in a positive light.

That creator, Jace Skell, used his fabulous wealth from his company to purchase an archipelago called Aurora, the fictional setting of Breakpoint, where he is building “the world of tomorrow, today.” Along with Skell, workers and engineers also inhabit Aurora along with the ever-present drones as they continue to produce more sophisticated AI and militaristic inventions.

The issue is that this technology has been hacked by a group of special operations forces with ill intentions called the Wolves (one of whom is played by Jon Bernthal) who have turned the island into a giant prison filled with roaming deathbots. That’s where the Ghosts come in and the objective of Ghost Recon: Breakpoint stands: stopping the Wolves and saving Skell.

“It’s focused more on the fun of the experience”

Despite the missed opportunity to inject a little commentary about the ethics of tech companies into the game, the decision to side-step reality and set Breakpoint on a fictional string of islands is a smart move considering the backlash the developers faced for its portrayal of Bolivia in Ghost Recon: Wildlands.

Wildlands took place entirely in Bolivia with the main objective being the eradication of drug dealers. While the environment was beautifully rendered, the people of Bolivia were painted with broad, unflattering strokes, making the country look like it’s inhabited entirely by villainous drug cartels.

I asked Tomkinson if the decision to set Breakpoint in a fictional place was in response to that criticism, if it was meant to allow them to focus more on the gameplay aspect than the societal aspect.

“It’s true, [Breakpoint] was a different take,” Tomkinson said. “It was more about the gameplay experience that we want to bring… it’s focused more on the fun of the experience.”

That experience, Tomkinson said, is about putting players in the boots of a spec ops soldier. 

“It’s not always about the gun fight,” he said.” We wanted to also bring all these survival aspects of the military where they have to spend lots of time traveling, exploring the environment, understanding the environment and also even resting with their colleagues/friends.”

SEE ALSO: Oculus Quest is a VR gaming revelation, but who is it for?

Ghost Recon: Breakpoint introduces things like injuries to the game, which players will have to spend time recovering from if they don’t want to spend the whole game limping around the map. This can include bullets lodged in limbs and injuries from falls.

There’s still this whole background thing happening with Skell Technology and killer drones, but Tomkinson said that’s exactly what it is — background.

“Like all Tom Clancy games, [Breakpoint] reflects a lot on what happens in the world. It’s based on real situations,” he said. “We have these background elements that are still very authentic, I would say, but our focus is about bringing a very cool and fun experience for players rather than really delivering a message about the world.”

As has been seen time and time again since the dawn of entertainment, artists can deliver experiences that are both entertaining and say something about the world. But hey, not everyone has to say something important.

That’s a choice.