Adalast @ Adalast @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

688

Joined

2 yr. ago

We are talking about the country who's leaders tried to ban flat chested women from porn because they "look too much like children".

Ummm, 3DS is owned by Autodesk, so you may as well consider them the same thing for this conversation, and Arnold is a renderer (also owned by Autodesk) and not a DCC, so not really relevant unless you are specifically comparing Blender's built-in render engines to it. The reason I am not is that there are lots of plugins for Blender which can output .ass files to be rendered by Arnold, so it can be utilized if you want to pay the subscription.

Blender is a DCC. Not one that I am super familiar with, I'm a Houdini guy myself, but honestly it is better in a lot of ways than the steaming piles of shit that Autodesk puts out. The question is not one of quality or feature at this point, but one of capital and market share where it counts. If they could figure out what is needed to get the likes of Disney or MPC on board, or even smaller (though arguably still very large/high profile) houses on-board, then they would be seeing much more investment.

Gonna call you out on this, at least partially. It was SideFX, a real threat of a proprietary vendor who has sizable market share in 3D/VFX, releasing an entirely perpetually free learning edition and a low cost indie license who put the screws on Autodesk. Blender contributed to the decision, but it was absolutely not the primary pressure source.

Source: I have a Masters Degree in VFX, have studied the industry for over 35 years, and have worked professionally in it for going on 15.

I agree. People keep suggesting Factorio, which leads me to believe that they have not actually read the post since his friend is into souls-likes and heavy combat games. Factorio is the antithesis of that! I don't personally play those games (Factorio is one of my most played games), so I can't make suggestions aside from Monster Hunter.

I wish I could filter out idle and clicker games. My biggies are Factorio and KSP for non-idle games. Several thousand hours in each.

Consider me a psycho with a hot take, but I have always preferred games that mix the enemy difficulties around in a zone. Something like Ark where, sure, level 3 Dodos spawn on the starting beaches, but a level 70 Spino can spawn not far away and you have to be sure to skirt it lest you become a healthy snack. The steady progression of "zone difficulty" has always bugged me a bit because it is just so far off from realistic. Sure, close to a settlement there would be culling of particularly dangerous creatures, but some of them would still exist (if the settlement is being responsible). And yeah, as you get farther into the wilds those sorts of cullings would fall off rapidly, but to say that there would be areas where there are no easy monsters or no hard monsters, even in the wilds, is just not accurate.

Also, you get the same feeling of accomplishment, sometimes more, when you have died to hard monsters in starting areas a bunch of times then learned to skirt aggro properly, but then suddenly you come back after being out for a while and utterly decimate them. Just feels so good.

I see you are another of my pedant tribe. Thank you for the correction and context. You are a scholar and a gentleman.

That is where punitive damages come in. Most huge settlements are substantially punitive, which are damages awarded not on merit, but with the express intent of making the settlement hurt enough that the offender, and others in similar situations, think twice about taking similar actions.

Except that most firms that charge $2000/hour take the fee from the settlement, not up front, when doing civil litigation. Really only criminal law is paid directly by the client, at least in the US.

Nope, they are covered most of the time by what is known as the "corporate veil".

Better explained than I can do here: https://federal-lawyer.com/when-can-a-ceo-be-held-personally-liable/

Essentially, unless they are personally doing it, they are protected. Embezzle millions and you go to jail, poison a water supply, kill thousands, give birth defects, cancer, and a myriad of other health issues to a community at large and only the corporation is liable/culpable.

Personally I want to see the criminal shield removed for corporations. All C-Level executives become personally liable for any illegal actions, malfeasance, slander/liable, or injurious action perpetrated or instigated by the company with the ONLY defense being proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt (not just reasonable doubt) that an actor within or without the company caused the action with the express intent of harming the C-Level executives, either specific or generally.

Fuck corporate personhood. Fuck people making a LLC and doing whatever the fuck they want under the guise of the company then the company declares bankruptcy while they run off like a cartoon character with bags of money. Leadership liability and culpability should be the norm, not the exception.

Oh, I'm here for it.

Itch is by no means a small time player. Doing some very fast statistics off of the game price breakdowns available and the counts of games available vs. the number they rate as best sellers, if 20% of their best sellers make a sale each day and 7.5% of their non-best sellers make a sale each day, assuming an average price for the three pricing filters of (under $5, $2.5), ($5 to $15, $10), (over $15, $20), then Itch sells approximately $20k/day. Half a day is $10k. If those averages are actually much higher in their respective areas, as in just below the maximum then the daily total jumps to over $35k/day. There is wiggle room in my assumptions, but it is safe to say that Itch sees about $25k±7k/day.

As mentioned in other suits, there are nonmonetary damages as well which are harder to quantify without access to their analytics such as reputation damage, lost traffic, maintenance and repair from the forced outage at the domain level, etc. I could see a suit for $50k in actual damages and another $500k-$1M in punitive damages to send the message that this behavior is intolerable in general.

Here here.

They are paranoid about foreign actors having personal data, not domestic ones. That said, the whole TikTok thing is as much about stifling international competition as it is about data privacy and who is getting/using said data. Meta, Alphabet, and their ilk all harvest much more data than TikTok, and sell it to data brokers. There is absolutely nothing stopping the Chinese government from just buying the data they would obtain from the mandatory data sharing forced upon Chinese companies.

TikTok took market share from Meta and Alphabet, Suckerberg and whoever is the head letter at Alphabet called up the Congressmen they bought and started making a fuss, so their boys on the hill found excuses to ban it.

I am not sayinf some of the excuses do not have kernels of merit, but they are largely overshadowed by the anticompetitive effect that it has.

Just to expand and answer your larger question, the US government does not respect the privacy of the citizens. The anti-data-brokerage legislation we did manage to get through only occurred AFTER the harvested data was used against those in office, and even then it was made an opt-out legislation which requires us to contact each brokerage firm individually and request, in writing, that our data be purged and we not be tracked. That exempts all new firms from the restrictions and relies on the individual to A. Know how to find the firms and B. Be able to manage contacting each one of them. What this has done is invented an entirely new service industry for removing OUR information from these brokerage firms. So we have to pay for privacy, yet again, making it something really reserved for the rich.

If you look at the other laws, things like license law and such, you will find that the US government has quite truly conspired to make sure that corporations have carte blanch to do whatever they want with those who use their services.

If I wasn't shit with UI Dev I would offer as this sounds like a great app, but alas.

Let's be accurate here, private slavery companies.

It was published, hence the first word being "Post-publication". I think the issue for the retraction is that if 4 or the reviewers were lying about their identies then the voracity of their assessments is strongly in question. As shitty as the modern peer review process is, its essence is vital for the progress of modern science.

This is the central myth of "free speech" under the 1st Amendment.

The 1st Amendment only protects individuals exercising speech and expression from laws being passed or used to silence said speech or expression and from agents of the government abridging the rights. That is a lot, but it is also all. Private citizens are allowed to abridge each other's speech as much as we like. Private companies can censor whatever they want. This is why the guy wrote a letter to Steam, because literally ANY larger action would have crossed the line.

Honestly, I had it all with line breaks, but it didn't take. I will fix.