conciselyverbose

I started to highlight bits to cut out and highlight as the key points, but it became pretty quickly that that link already is the executive summary. It's already basically in outline form, and a super quick read.

You don't need to rely on the headline.

Is web of trust still a thing?

That was intended to be kind of a distributed way to determine who didn't suck.

I didn't buy it, but I don't know how you can bash something clearly experimental like that that leveraged the hardware in unique and interesting ways.

For interaction? Pseudonyms with a ramp up into being able to interact fully is the middle ground. Your activity on that specific site will be monitored to kick you out if you behave inappropriately, but it shouldn't carry across sites unless you voluntarily use a third party identity provider (which is a good option to have).

Massive scale is a big part of the issue. It raises the barrier to entry for competing platforms (because being able to scale to rapid growth is a huge up front investment, and can easily cripple your platform if you don't do so), and brings the moderation responsibilities beyond anything actually manageable. Small to mid sized communities being the norm is much more manageable, much easier to develop for, and much healthier generally.

To be fair, I don't think he's actually a bad dude either. Again, flawed, but reasonably well intentioned.

The "worst" thing they did was definitely developing feelings while she's engaged to Roy, but most of that was the nature of working in close proximity. It's inherently different than sneaking around to spend "platonic" time together for a bunch of hours by choice. He had feelings, but mostly didn't cross the line. I don't think he's a terrible person for laying his feelings on the line when she's engaged to someone he doesn't like either. Actually married is the line where it moves to completely not OK.

But yeah, the whole end thing really wasn't anyone being awful. He unilaterally made some decisions that should have been a partnership, and he was wrong to put that much stress on her without talking to her and hearing her. Because they had kids, primarily. But he did recognize that and came back and made the commitment to their family. Then, once she had time to actually breathe again, she was ready to take the leap with him.

That was longer than I meant it to be again lol. But I was surprised to hear the take (and that it was more popular than I'd guess) because it genuinely never occurred to me. She was in pretty deep and he was lashing out from the stress of the situation before she even vocalized her problems with it. (At least from what we see.)

So after all the people actually playing it came up for air lol?

It doesn't matter if the copy is all at once. Every bit of the file touching your computer involves multiple copies. It is fundamentally impossible to share any file without copies being made. The original digitization is already probably illegal because it's for the purpose of distribution and not one of the fair use exceptions. Again, this is exactly identical to the claim that pirate sites providing streaming is legal.

Libraries do not make copies. Legally, it's exactly that simple. There is no ambiguity in any way. It is copyright infringement under current law. It is not possible to defend this without throwing current law in the trash and starting over from scratch. If the judge did somehow rule in IA's favor the Supreme Court could overrule him in about 30 seconds with basically no deliberation. Courts do not have the authority to change the law.

Maybe he's just enthusiastic about a game that does something he's into?

I was listening to a football podcast (they go off topic in the offseason because there isn't a lot to talk about), and they had a whole rant about how Pam Beasley is a monster.

Because she was friends with Jim while dating Roy. (Yeah him having feelings for her wasn't exactly a shocker, but it's different when it's you. And she shut him down clearly when he actually made a move.)

Because she did the art school thing, I guess?

Because she was sad when Jim was dating Karen. (She did genuinely try to be her friend despite that, and went to cry in a corner alone.)

And because there was tension when Jim did Athlead. (Which if you actually watch, was him biting her head off when she messed up with a video of a recital, and him instigating a couple other times, presumably because of the stress of the situation, while she was being run ragged as almost a single mother at home.)

And because apparently chasing your dreams going to New York to go to art school while in a relationship is the same as doing it when you're actually married and have kids. But she didn't bend over backward enough to support him I guess?

It's just really weird to me, and he's not the only one with that weird twist on the character. (No she's not perfect. Sitcoms are all characters who are kind of monsters. But her as the bad guy doesn't make sense.)

Yeah, I'm not really disagreeing with him, though I do think Elden Ring is one of the least janky games I've ever played. It really does feel incredibly consistent to me. Compared to something like the Witcher where even walking doesn't seem to stop in the same place consistently, it really does work pretty well IMO. I think the older games did feel a lot sloppier, but Elden Ring took a step forward into super smooth control to me.

But I would like a better visual cue.

Memorizing everything is impressive for a human.

It's less impressive for a computer.

I would much rather pay full price than still pay for a DRMed version that's effectively guaranteed to be supporting some sort of organized crime group. Mass distribution at scale, with DRM, by definition means Russian organized crime, or a drug cartel, or some other global bad actor on that scale that's doing shit like trafficking humans, arms dealing, drugs, etc, as well.

But ignoring that (and that I generally buy my content), I wouldn't pay $.10 for an illegitimate copy that had an added layer of DRM on it. It's fundamentally fucking repulsive for some subgroup whose whole business relies on bypassing someone else's copy control to add their own.

Good video.

I get his point and agree with some of it (I'd rather boss designs not lean on your invincibility), but I just fundamentally feel like dodging against the grain of attacks adds something. It would be cool if, as the engines get better, you got more animations where you slid over, hopped over, etc attacks instead of just rolling and not taking damage.

DRM on pirated games is fucking gross as shit.

I think your best bet is probably some kind of kiddy pool/pet bath with sufficient depth. Even most jacuzzi style tubs aren't actually big enough for an adult to float in.

Would take a lot of salt though.

I'm guessing you'd have to be pretty deliberate about preventing corrosion.

For me personally just salt water goes a long way, though. I go to the beach when I can and I'll spend an hour floating in 2 feet of 60° water and feel amazing for a week.

But there's a very clear distinction in the law. Libraries are covered under first sale doctrine. You can do effectively what you want with a physical object that contains copyrighted material placed there by the owner.

Digital anything is not covered by the first sale doctrine. Every individual loan is a copy. Every time a "copy" moves between devices is a copy. There is no legal framework for ownership of anything digital. It's always a license, no matter what permissions that license grants you.

You have to pass new laws to match the digital world. Under the current laws, it's extremely clear that lending unauthorized digital copies of a physical book is copyright infringement. Wholesale copies of a work aren't even in the neighborhood of fair use, especially when you're distributing a bunch of them. DRMing those copies is completely irrelevant legally.

Why exactly do they need to be targeting photorealism with shit like PBR?

https://fortelabs.co/blog/the-secret-power-of-read-it-later-apps

So this article was included with Omnivore, which is suggested elsewhere in this thread, but it does provide a bunch of well structured arguments for the utility of a dedicated app.

Hey, they also decided to take screenshots of everything you do every 2 seconds and put them in an unsecured database. That might work.

It's too bad conspiracy theorists bullied them into half assed encryption and allowing people to turn it off until next time Microsoft reverts it.

Yep. Libraries can't just buy an ebook like they can buy a book. They have to negotiate a contract with the copyright holder to be able to lend them out.

Then write new laws. Digitizing the book is already relying on fair use. Judges aren't lawmakers, and this case doesn't have the tiniest hint of the tiniest shred of a leg to stand on.

There is no first sale doctrine for digital. There is no such thing as ownership of a "digital copy" to begin with. The framework doesn't exist. You have a license.

For IGN, a gaming media company?

Their ownership of FromSoft is by far the most relevant thing to IGN's audience. The article wouldn't have any reason to exist otherwise.

Thanks for this. I don't usually dive into longer format article stuff because I find it on my phone and reading on my phone sucks. I tried pocket, but it didn't function at all on my reader.

This solves that problem reasonably well.

(Edit: also an RSS reader? Maybe I should start using RSS again. I do wish it offered paged navigation controls to better work on an ereader, but it's definitely an improvement still.)

I really don't think anyone envisioned the way digital distribution would change when the DMCA was written.

But my point isn't that there's political will to make a change, but that the judiciary really doesn't have the capacity to rule any other way than the obvious "you can't do this". It would be a completely wild precedent for this case to somehow result in a ruling that it's fair use based on the actual law and the history of previous rulings.

Because the libraries have explicit licenses from the IP holders.

The encryption is literally entirely irrelevant.

The argument that a copy in your browser is legally defensible is the equivalent of claiming that sites can legally stream movies to you. It is a copy, both legally and in reality.

Because everything about Brave is complete fucking nonsense and doing business with them in any way is deranged.

Seriously.

Yes, there's an element of complexity that makes it hard to completely avoid bugs. But there's way more arbitrary complexity that doesn't serve a purpose and unnecessary dependencies that create more problems than they solve causing issues than there is just the inherent difficulty of what software actually needs to do.

Also, maybe just don't copy paste code from 20 different tracking tools wherever they tell you to.

Edit: also cloud everything. The amount of overhead it takes to put 100 million users in the cloud when there's nothing they need that can't be done locally is stupid as hell.

If we're talking "free" devices with some commitment, I'm OK with some limitation until the terms are met.

The second you charge a dollar for it, it should be unconditionally illegal to have it carrier locked the day they walk out of the store. 60 days isn't good enough.

The number of the games on this list that are in my library and I haven't played...

I tried. It's basically the only app I couldn't get to work on my boox.

Netflix can't do what got them to the top.

Fuck everything about the changes they've made for the last several years, but they were always going to hit a wall when content owners put their content on their own platforms.

The entire source of their growth was "you can get almost anything you want to watch for one low monthly cost". They no longer have rights to any of that content, and for most of it didn't even get an opportunity to make a bid.

It's the equivalent of Oreo shipping 3 Oreos in a big box for 3x the price. But also they had to change their recipe because they didn't own the old one.

I absolutely install stuff that doesn't have a signature verified by Apple, but you should be damn sure you know what you're installing before bypassing that security.

They can ban them for TOS violations. Good luck suing.

It's still massively downgraded from a console. And many faster twitch games are straight up unplayable in the absolute best case scenario.

I'm not into the subscription library thing (though I do have PS+ premium, because it was a reasonably cheap upgrade from the base package on Black Friday when I caved and bought a subscription), but I can see how some people find value in the subscription library that's included.

That said, fuck Luna specifically, because I tried the "included with prime" version with one of the legends of heroes games, got moderately hooked, and it will only let you export the saves when they remove the game from the paid library. So even your saves are held hostage to a paid subscription.

What's the value of cheap clothes that aren't even suitable for a single wear?

Who was the one who couldn't make the jump on the cup head tutorial? Was that the Verge?