• 1 Post
  • 226 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • Conspiracy theory: they realised this news was about to break, and removed the comment section because they expected a shitshow where every one of their customers saw comments pointing out their crimes.

    As a dub watcher, the comment section was important. The dub comments were the only place to see what an unsubtitled background sign said or which scene had been cut from the manga that explained why something weird happened without there being comments from sub watchers full of spoilers for a couple of episodes later, which they don’t consider spoilers as the subtitled version of that episode was a week old.



  • It makes sense, but it also makes sense to design society so that situations where it’s helpful happen as rarely as possible. If some people are predisposed to being a good firefighter, it doesn’t negate the fact that you don’t want buildings to catch fire in the first place, so you still want to teach children not to play with matches, teach adults not to keep lighter fuel near their heater, and ban companies from selling combustible cladding to insulate tower blocks. Prevention is better than cure. You just then have a load of people who aren’t great at being anything except a firefighter, ready for fires that never happen, and under the current system, forced either into jobs they’re bad at, or into chronic stress to get consistent productivity.


  • I said he more-or-less killed him, not that he actually killed him. Care was not taken to ensure he’d be revived or revivable. He was left forgotten in a pocket. The likely outcome was that he remained forgotten and didn’t get wet until he’d been dropped under some furniture, crushed like a stock cube or gone mouldy. Maybe he had dependents, like a young child who’d have died without their parent. It being theoretically possible to revive someone later doesn’t make turning them into a dehydrated cube meaningfully better than making them dead if you don’t have a strong plan with a failsafe to make sure they stop being a cube. Even with guaranteed revival, if they’re a cube for long enough that they notice the lost time, it’s just like roofying someone and holding them hostage for a while. Do not turn museum guys into dehydrated cubes.






  • A big part of the reason was that Facebook offered game studios a big upfront sum if they made their games work on whatever headset they were selling at the time in standalone mode with no major caveats. The headset only had an anemic mobile GPU, so was only capable of as much as mobile games were doing at the time. A bunch of studios took them up on this offer, and cut back their projects’ scope to be viable under the hardware constraints, so nearly everything that got made was gimmicky mobile-style minigames, and obviously that’s not what makes people want to drop hundreds of dollars on hardware, as they can get their fill by borrowing someone else’s headset for an hour.

    Mobile GPUs have improved, so standalone headsets aren’t as terrible now, but we missed the expensive toy for enthusiasts and arcades phase and soured most people’s opinions by making their first VR experience shovelware.


  • The arguments used to make the First Sale Doctrine apply to books a hundred years ago are equally applicable to games and other software, and consumers should demand they’re given the rights they deserve to use the copies of media they’ve paid for. You should be able to sell on a used video game once you’ve finished it, or lend it to a friend, just like you can with a book or a DVD.

    That said, the title’s a little misleading. Libraries only lend each copy of a book to one person at a time (if it’s a physical book, it’s pretty obvious that it can only be in one place at once), and the ruling the headline refers to says that a copy of a retro game can only be lent out to one person at once, which is understandable, even if it’s a massive pain when plenty of games don’t have many working copies left in circulation.


  • It’s not realistic to demand to own games in the same way as a spoon any time soon. It is, however, pretty reasonable to demand you own games like you’d own a book. You can chop up a book and use it to make a paper maché dog, but you can’t chop up the words within to make a new derivative book (or just copy them as its to get another copy of the same book except for a single backup that you’re not allowed to transfer to someone else unless you also give them the original). The important things you can do with a book but not a game under the current system, even with Gog, are things like selling it on or giving it away when you’re done with it and lending it out like a library.

    About a hundred years ago, book publishers tried using licence agreements in books to restrict them in similar ways to how games and other software are restricted today, but courts decided that was completely unreasonable, and put a stop to it. In the US, that’s called the First Sale Doctrine, but it has other names elsewhere or didn’t even need naming. All the arguments that applied to books apply equally well to software, so consumers should demand the same rights.








  • I’m pretty sure Reddit used to be profitable. There used to be a bar on the right-hand side that showed how far each day’s Reddit Gold purchases had gone towards covering the day’s server costs. When I first started using Reddit, it’d typically be about a third of the way full when it reset, but a few years after the at, it was filling up after about eight hours, suggesting they were covering the server costs three times over, which should have left plenty of money for staffing costs as they didn’t have many staff back then. Eventually, they got rid of the bar. Later, they did things that would have increased costs, like hiring people to make New Reddit and the Reddit App, and hosting images and videos themselves instead of leaving it to imgur, and I guess these were enough to make them no longer profitable and force them to aim for faster growth.


  • I was reinforcing your point about using a monitor and a Linux PC not being able to replace all the things a smart TV can do. You said streaming would work, but regular TV channels wouldn’t, and I pointed out that even streaming would be limited as the major streaming services don’t allow full quality via a browser, especially on Linux where HDCP can’t work.


  • I’m not arguing for anything in the post above, just pointing out that a broken (or badly repaired) insulin pump is genuinely more dangerous than having no insulin pump. That doesn’t have to count against the right to repair one, as if you’ve got the right to repair an insulin pump, and do so badly, it doesn’t mean you’re legally forced to use it afterwards, just like I’ve got the right to inject all the insulin in my fridge with an insulin pen back to back, but I’m not legally forced to do so.

    I do think the right to repair should be universal, but as I think that medical stuff should be paid for by the state, NHS-style, that would end up meaning that the NHS could repair medical devices themselves if they deemed it more economical to do so and recertify things as safe than to get the manufacturer to repair or replace them. The NHS is buying the devices, and gets the right to repair them, and that saves the taxpayer money, as even if they don’t actually end up repairing anything, it stops manufacturers price gouging for repairs and replacements, and if the manufacturer goes bust or refuses to repair something, there’re still ways to keep things working. It doesn’t mean unqualified end users can’t use their new right to repair their medical devices and risk getting it wrong, but if you’ve got an option of a free repair/replacement, most people would choose the safe and certified repair over their own bodge.