Don_alForno @ Don_alForno @feddit.de

Posts

0

Comments

44

Joined

2 yr. ago

Sounds like taxes with extra steps.

The EU can't "save" the rest of the world alone, true. All I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily require the entire globe to cooperate to outlaw something just because it's on the Internet. And that Mozilla scheme won't save you either.

I mean they don't have to literally jail advertisers (although I'd love that). I'd agree with hefty fines. Which, while not perfect, several EU laws have shown is possible unilaterally (e.g. Apple allowing third party app stores in the EU, albeit kicking and screaming).

I agree that it's a mountain to climb, but we sure won't reach the summit if we walk in the other direction.

Opt-in IS simple. Mom just won't opt in.

Privacy based advertizing:

1. Develop ad
2. Think about what websites your target demographic will probably frequent. (Be creative, dear marketing person! You can do it! This is the essence of what you're getting paid for!)
3. Pay those sites to display your ad

Done.

Forget about the technical details and whether the user understands what it is.

No. Why? It's simple. They are collecting data I don't want the ad networks to have instead of the ad networks and give it to the ad networks. That's only more private than the status quo if I'm okay with them to have this data and trust them to handle it responsibly. Which I have no reason to.

which is why they correctly say that the user won't understand the Feature.

See explanation above. That's not too complicated to explain to a person that managed to turn on the computer. It only gets complicated when you try to follow the mental gymnastics you need to think this feature adds privacy for anybody.

Sadly, tracking is the only way to perform attribution without help from the browser. Tracking is terrible for privacy, because it gives companies detailed information about what you do online. While Firefox includes many privacy protections that make it more difficult for sites to track you online (Enhanced Tracking Protection, Total Cookie Protection, Query Parameter Stripping, and many other measures), there’s a huge incentive for sites to find ways around these in order to perform attribution. Our hope is that if we develop a good attribution solution, it will offer a real alternative to more objectionable practices like tracking.

"Our hope is, that if we transfer the bank robber some of our money in advance, they'll not come in and rob all of it."

No! Jail the fucker!

People who don't pay income tax in the first place because they are so rich they don't need a normal income. Those need to be taxed more.

I don't think that's what they're getting at.

If "should" is all the argument you've got, I'm not convinced.

It is actually an excellent idea, because it ensures billionaires don't just move to Switzerland to evade taxes.

"Rational"

"Petrol price controls"

How does this even make sense? You can't pay more in taxes than the earnings you're paying taxes on. If you deliberately cause a 10 million loss reducing your earnings by those 10 million and thereby saving a percentage of those 10 million in taxes, you're not very good at math, are you?

It looks like an Octopath spin-off. Which is a good thing.

Article without tracking paywall bullshit.

So, the player frustration this quest is inspiring isn't a straight-up next entry in the long-running paid mods debate that's been going on within the Bethesda community with regards to the Creation Club for a while now, but rather folks simply being unhappy with the monetisation practices Bethesda's employing with regards to its own stuff.

I suppose that will be part of it, but it takes a load of willful ignorance to not see that the reason they distribute it this way is to ease people into the idea of using the infrastructure they ultimately set up to monetize other people's work (i.e. mods).

With how frequently they get hacked, Sony is the last company you want to trust with any of your data. Might as well post all of it on a public facebook page.

If I were a dev, that wouldn't be my priority in a first person Game either.

I repeatedly spend time deciding on clothing choices etc for my character only to proceed to never actually see them outside the menu.

Well, yeah, XIV as an MMO is a different thing. But that one also doesn't have revenue issues afaik.

Maybe it's because Final Fantasy peaked at VII-X and went downhill from there, fucking up their combat further and further with every installment?

The average movie isnt worth ticket price either

The worth of a thing is determined by what people will pay for it.

length certainly doesn't equal quality.

For any single product that's true, statistically it makes the two classes (games and movies) comparable.

I don't think you'll earnestly want to argue that 1 hour of movie entertainment is in general worth multiple hours of gaming entertainment. There are good and bad movies and games, but if you compare those of similar quality, the fact stands that the game will give you more for your money. Whether you want more of course depends on you - I gather that gaming doesn't seem to really entertain you for the most part.

If the game cost $20, they'd have to sell about 120k copies to break even on that Investment,

Far more actually. You have to deduct taxes, steam's cut etc. from those 20$.