XChat is now on the App Store, where its listing says that it’s expected to be available for download on April 17. This isn’t the same IRC app from the early aughts, which you may remember if you’re of a certain age. This is a messaging app specifically for X users. X chief Elon Musk first talked about rolling out a new version of his social network’s direct messaging feature in mid-2025. In a series of posts back then, he said the new version would be encrypted and would feature a “whole new architecture.” He also said all X users were getting XChat in June last year, but Musk is pretty infamous for being overly optimistic about timelines.

Now, instead of an upgraded DM feature on X, users are getting a standalone app. It allows them to chat with anybody on X and call each other across devices. The app is end-to-end encrypted and will let users edit and delete their messages for all participants in the conversation. It will also allow users to block screenshots and enable disappearing messages if they want the sensitive details they send in-chat to vanish within five minutes. The app allows users to create massive group chats with up to 481 members, as well. X promises in the App Store listing that XChat will not have ads and will not be tracking users.

Users can now pre-order XChat for iPhones and iPads so that it automatically downloads on their device when it comes out.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apps/xs-messaging-app-xchat-may-be-available-soon-114722904.html?src=rss

According to a Bloomberg report, Nintendo will slash production of the Switch 2 this quarter from the originally planned six million units down to four million, a 30% drop. The reduced production is expected to continue into April.

Read Entire Article

---

Earlier this week, the operator of ROM distribution site and self-described "video game preservation service" Myrient announced plans to shut it down as of the end of this month. They advised folks to download any files from the collection that said folks were keen to hold onto ahead of the closure. A group of volunteers have decided to take that to another level, working together to archive all of Myrient's files so they can be preserved for posterity.

Read more

Spotify has announced that it is "updating" the price of its service over the next month for subscribers in the US, Estonia, and Latvia.

Read Entire Article

I can think of a few.  I am not thinking of ongoing struggles, such as the funding of opposition to the Sandinistas, rather I wish to focus on cases where the key leaders actually were removed.  After all, we know that is the case in Venezuela today.  Maybe these efforts were rights violations, or unconstitutional, and yes that matters.  But how did they fare in utilitarian terms?

Puerto Rico: 1898, a big success.

Mexican-American War: Removed Mexican leaders from what today is the American Southwest.  Big utilitarian success, including for the many Mexicans who live there now.

Chile, and the coup against Allende: A utilitarian success, Chile is one of the wealthiest places in Latin America and a stable democracy today.

Grenada: Under Reagan, better than Marxism, not a huge success, but certainly an improvement.

Panama, under the first Bush, or for that matter much earlier to get the Canal built: Both times a big success.

Haiti, under Clinton, and also 1915-1934: Unclear what the counterfactuals should be, still this case has to be considered a terrible failure.

Cuba, 1906-1909: Unclear?  Nor do I know enough to assess the counterfactual.

Dominican Republic, 1961-1954, starting with Trujillo.  A success, as today the DR is one of the wealthiest countries in Latin America.  But the positive developments took a long time.

I do not know enough about the U.S. occupation of the DR 1916-1924 to judge that instance.  But not an obvious success?

Can we count the American Revolution itself?  The Civil War?  Both I would say were successes.

We played partial but perhaps non-decisive roles in regime changes in Ecuador 1963 and Brazil 1964, in any case I consider those results to be unclear.  Maybe Nicaragua 1909-1933 counts here as well.

So the utilitarian in you, at least, should be happy about Venezuela, whether or not you should be happy on net.

You should note two things.  First, the Latin interventions on the whole have gone much better than the Middle East interventions.  Perhaps that is because the region has stronger ties to democracy, and also is closer to the United States, both geographically and culturally.  Second, looking only at the successes, often they took a long time and/or were not exactly the exact kinds of successes the intervenors may have sought.

Absher, Grier, and Grier consider CIA activism in Latin America and find poor results.  I think much of that is springing from cases where we failed to remove the actual leaders, such as Nicaragua and Cuba.  Simply funding a conflict does seem to yield poor returns.

The post U.S. interventions in the New World, with leader removal appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.