And what does that mean? That drivers for most hardware doesn’t exist unless we write it ourselves? I don’t have time for that steep a climb.
You guys are now seriously freaking me out. My experience has been decades of windows not mainframes with 1980s era OSes. Is all that experience going to be useless?
I’m looking forward to owning my computer, especially as Microsoft claws away more of my rights season by season. But WTF am I getting myself into when I make the jump? Is it possible to own my computer and have an easy to understand OS?
I hope I’m not fucking myself when I try to make the switch, but when the first response to it’s got problems is don’t look a gift horse in the mouth then yeah, it makes me a bit worried I’m going to be left out in the elements on my own by a community with the attitude of COD gamers.
It’s part of how I remember id est versus exempli gratia
The problem is noted by Karl Marx, the capitalist inevitably captures the government and its regulating departments so that the body of laws will be revised in their favor. Remember that the point of copyright laws in the Constitution of the United States, to promote science and the useful arts was killed when IP was extended. Every year that someone owns an idea is year that the rest of us does not.
I don’t know the solution, but corruption of the temporary monopoly was inevitable.
I assume UBI. Already quality of product is not cultivated by the current publishing system. People who get their books published do so by affording a good agent with connections, which rules out the black kid using a manual typewriter her brother rebuilt.
Maybe capitalism doesn’t work, except for the richest capitalists?
Most IP owners didn’t create what they have, but bought it off someone else. I have little pity for rich people.
I’d say society is better off with no IP related temporary monopoly than the system we have. There are enough instances where creators die penniless and publishers make all the profits to suggest there already is no financial incentive for an inventor to invent. Like Goodyear, they do it more as a hobby or in the interest of society.
Maybe if we had social safety nets so everyone not rich wasn’t desperate, we might be able to have a robust innovation sector that was less focused on using law to screw competitors and consumers.
Billions typically paid for by government subsidy, id est taxpayers. I’m not sure what the justification is for private IP rights when the capital is socialized.
Youtube’s ad policy is abusive, and online ads are not always safe. Regardless of whether adblocking is legal or fair to Youtube, not doing so puts you at greater risk of malware insertion so is a necessary safety precaution.
As YouTube profits from your engagement through more than ads, YouTube still benefits even when you watch videos without ads.
To answer your question, for the non-tech-savvy having to pick a server is, yes, too much of a leap. We are conditioned in the industrialized capitalist world against making decisions we don’t understand.
If we want to market it, we could make a wizard that randomly designates a server from a set of cooperating servers. Include also reminders that a user can join multiple servers and each one has separate rules (say, regarding posting NSFW material even to appropriate communities.)
I just talked to a Redditor who was entirely unfamiliar with the recent changes at Reddit.
Okay when I was considering builds, I was figuring on Mint, but since that’s an Ubuntu variant, I take that’s a bad idea now?
Does the game just disappear if it was never cracked?
Considering there are tons of games that are no longer supported, the answer is yes, the game customer is left to the elements when the publisher decides they’re done. And with the current DMCA, we’re not even legally allowed to break DRM for legal purposes (such as to play games we bought when the DRM is no longer supported.)
Curiously, it does send a message for the determined end user that legality is only for suckers (or for companies who have to operate within the constraints of licensing). Curiously, Windows 10 and 11 depend on the ignorance of upper management regarding the degree to which Microsoft has surveillance access, since companies don’t get to medium-sized without having a few skeletons in the accounting closet. I’m surprised so few companies haven’t switched to Linux Red Hat (which has a similar support package) but then Red Hat is going through its own scandals right now.
Anyway, if your game is popular, you can expect the old version to be supported until the redux comes out. If it’s a niche game produced by a company that the publisher bought a while ago and would like to forget, yes, it’ll disappear into the aether as you watch.
Right now we already have aluminum printers and arrays that will turn a stone (wood, ice, etc) block into a detailed sculpture.
The cool thing is that prototypes can be printed and then turned into dyes to be filled with steel and cast, and NGOs are using this tech to arm African villages against warlords.
About the same time we make fusion power viable, well be able to construct civil projects in a simulation, test it against the elements with an advanced physics engine and then send an array of constructor robots to build it from the ground up.
Just in time for humanity to get wiped back to the stone age from perpetual severe weather.
taking something that does not belong to you does not explain how it is obvious that piracy is stealing, and suggests you don’t actually know the difference.
Do you know the difference between copyright infringement / patent infringement and theft?
Care to try again?
You revised your text to change its wording. No footnotes.
And then you accuse me of ignoring or misunderstanding without acknowledgement that you’ve altered the thread.
I can no longer assume that you’re arguing in good faith.
ELI5 then. How is it obvious that piracy is stealing? How is piracy not moral?
You certainly asserted such by arguing piracy is morally wrong. If IP belonged to the public (id est there’s no patent or copyright) then everything would be in the public domain. Media piracy would not be a thing.
But you assert not only is it a thing but it is morally wrong.
So please, by what authority are you asserting puts IP in the hands of private interests, thus making piracy a moral wrongdoing?
We also get little conversation about how copyright extensions and patent trilling robs the public use of public-domain content, especially when the Mouse is lobbying the federal government to extend rights further.