Goronmon @ Goronmon @kbin.social

Posts

73

Comments

108

Joined

2 yr. ago

So, its not a $700 monthly bill, it's $350, which is a pretty important detail to leave out.

2500 kWh is pretty massive though. We have a smaller house but with multiple air window conditioners running we only use roughly 1k a month.

You're electricity is actually significantly cheaper than mine, Our base price is the $0.14 kWh, which is lower than the standard rate from the utility company which last I remember was something like $0.23.

But is that dev headache worse than if you didn't have feature parity with X/S models, where games would have different features depending on which console you owned?

I think if you are going to have X/S type models, feature parity is something you just have to require, even if it causes headaches. The result for the customer would be much worse otherwise.

Don't you see. The Switch 2 may have an LCD or an OLED screen! It also may, or may not, have backwards compatibility with the first Switch! It also may, or may not, release in 2024!

How can anyone not be potentially excited about these things that may, or may not, be true!

Yeah, mine barely lasted to years before it just refused to boot.

Don't the miyoo devices go in stock for like 2 minutes s couple times a month? I was checking for a while at one point and only saw it in stock once over the span of weeks.

Edit: I see that the plus it's actually a new device with a easier to source, but worse, screen. That's unfortunate.

WEI prevents ecosystem lock-in through hold-backs
We had proposed a hold-back to prevent lock-in at the platform level. Essentially, some percentage of the time, say 5% or 10%, the WEI attestation would intentionally be omitted, and would look the same as if the user opted-out of WEI or the device is not supported.

This is designed to prevent WEI from becoming “DRM for the web”.

At least this acknowledges that this proposal would in fact be "DRM for the web" if the only thing from preventing it from being that is an additional measure unrelated to the core implementation.

Not to mention, what prevents a future release of the feature either turning the percentage to 0% or removing the hold-back entirely?

If it wasn't in the terms and they deleted your account, what would you do? And would that action be different than if account deletion was outlined in a terms agreement?

Any service out there has the ability to delete your account whether that ability is outlined in some terms somewhere or not.

If you are truly afraid that a company will delete your account randomly, then I suggest only using services you have complete control over.

Nah it's just outrage bait. It's come up before many years ago.

I would be surprised if most online services don't have similar language to outline an ability to remove accounts. It would be weird not to.

Just Nintendo though.

Sony, Microsoft, Sega, Activision-Blizzard, Rockstar, etc all just care about producing quality games for people to enjoy and don't really care about being paid for them.

Digital media is unique in that it’s not highly visible and using it more doesn’t make it degrade.

I'm not sure what they has to do with whether the business involved in funding and creating the media wants to be paid for that work. But I'll provide more examples if that helps.

Disney doesn't want you to watch their movies, they want you to pay to watch their movies.
Netflix doesn't want you to watch their shows, they want you to pay for a subscription.
Sony doesn't want you to play their games, they want you to buy their games.
Apple doesn't want you to listen to music, they want you to pay to listen to music.

You’d think Nintendo want’s people to play their games, but you’d be wrong. Nintendo wants people to buy their games.

Ford doesn't want you to drive their cars, they want you to buy their cars.
Apple doesn't want you to use their computers/phones, they want you to buy their computers/phones.
My town doesn't want me to use water, it wants me to pay for that water.

Same reason why people are still on Twitter and Reddit, the majority can’t be arsed to push back against companies.

Or they just want to watching something on their television after work and have other priorities other than some "war against Netflix" that a couple corners of the internet are angry about?

As much as some gamers will try to frame this as a win, he’s not losing...

There was no real outcome to this situation where Kotick loses. Either he stays, makes millions of dollars and continues to lead the company, or he leaves and makes millions of dollars during his exit. Those were always the two options.

I don't see the value in complaining about things that haven't happened yet.

Still better than cable ever was. No long term contracts, extra fees on bills, tons of useless channels and tons of ads.

I think people forget how bad cable TV actually is if they haven't used it for a while.

Well, yeah, as long as you can externalized almost all of the cooling configuration in additional to the power supply....but I doubt that's the route an actual PS5 slim is going to take.

The vast majority of the people online don't give a shit about technology, they just care about what technology can do for them. So, if we are talking about a platform like Twitter/Threads, people want a platform that allows to them follow/interact with the people they want to follow or interact with. They don't care if it's open/closed-source, if it's harvest your data, etc. They just want to use it the platform, that's it.

And now we are seeing the results as games have in general become so much less innovative and safe than historically.

I don't know if I would agree that Activision-Blizzard is the example to hold up for innovation and risk-taking in game development.

Never mind that it’s objectively anti-consumer/anti-competitive...

I'm curious what you think is the anti-competitive aspect of this merger? Who is the competition that is being unfairly harmed by this merger?