richmondez @ Mondez @lemdro.id

Posts

0

Comments

100

Joined

12 mo. ago

Finally linux will have parity in useability with windows.

Not really, because it doesn't guarantee any specific individual in that population has any of the populations likely traits, it's only useful in aggregate for things like prioritising screening for certain genetic conditions for people of particular back ground. It's useless to determine if someone will be an excellent sprinter or a fighter pilot because ultimately you still have to test every individual anyhow and it doesn't really tell you anything about the "tree" of human evolution which is really a bunch of thick branches all tightly fused together into an indistinguishable single branch.

It's because there aren't distinct populations like you perhaps imagine them being, it's more like a smeared colour pallet where one area might be a bit more red or a bit more blue but it's hard to say a specific area is pure blue. The distinct features or populations exist as statistical probabilities based on likely ancestry for a given area. Any given individual in a population probably doesn't express all the "unique" features, but over the total population those features are most prevalent.

Regarding Neanderthals and denisovian populations, they were probably more like what we'd call subspecies in other animals than truly distinct species from modern humans, isolated long enough to build up some unique genetic markers but not quite long enough to be fully separate.

Doesn't matter if not everyone is traveling far to reproduce, it only takes a few people to introduce a blob of diversity into an otherwise isolated population and suddenly all their ancestors become contributors to that areas gene pool. Without repeated introductions it won't form a large part but it will form part. For example most people have direct neanderthal and denisovian ancestors and it's not estimated that pairing between modern humans and those populations were all that regular an event and yet their genes are everywhere.

It's worth noting that distinct lineages only really happen where there is reproductive isolation and that especially in the modern world no one has a "pure" lineage. Instead you have genetic composition that might have a larger influence from one ancestral population over an other.

Doesn't Anna's Archive mirror libgen amongst other things?

But there are games that have the same problems today, they just look better because they have higher resolution assets but as still riddled with bugs and control issues.

Maximising their return on investment presumably figuring that the increased fee will bring in more money despite some customers cancelling.

You are right my argument was predicated on the price rise being justified by piracy not the cause of it. If they don't like ESPNs pricing model can't they license their content elsewhere?

Better by which objective metric? Amount of content? Total size of game code and data? Got to disagree with you otherwise.

I'd argue that is true of any generation, a few games are must plays and endure as such, then there are many that are just okay even at the time and then a bunch of crap it's hardly worth playing.

Yeah, that isn't how economics work, they increased the price because they believe it will be a more profitable price point. I guess they could argue they lost the price sensitive customers to piracy and are just giving up on that segment and focusing on the people who just pay whatever?

Tell that to console manufacturers. Or Apple for that matter.

Technicality of usage rights is very relevant, framing as a purchase where it actually isn't is dishonest and the fact that they make more money being dishonest doesn't make it right. Other than that you used an awful lot of words to basically agree with me.

No, no ownership is being conferred except to a number, the supporters club key let's call it. That is what you are buying, it's like an NFT. And just like NFTs it's being marketed as though you are purchasing the work itself which you absolutely are not doing. You are paying for the right to say you paid.

If you don't pay you are in exactly the same state as if you paid regarding your license to use the software, it's licensed to you under the terms of the agplv3. If they were selling a support contract that would be fine too, but again, no, you get no extra support over what anyone posting a issue on the tracker will get. Even if it were a support contract then it should be made clear that is what you buy.

Buying confers ownership of something even if it's just a legal agreement like a software license. No ownership over immich is being conferred, nothing is being conveyed to anyone so it's incorrect to term it a purchase, much less a purchase of immich.

None of those things are true. Paying money is in no way guaranteeing the current developers will wake up wanting to maintain it tomorrow, nor am I purchasing access to an update service. It isn't a purchase of anything and shouldn't be framed as one. It's a Contribution or a donation that gives nothing in return and saying it's something else is dishonest.

Except it's misleading as you aren't really buying it, you are buying a supporters badge key as I understand it. Might as well be selling an immich NFT. I still don't think this is being upfront and it's still a dark pattern it's just slightly less misleading than the blatantly false buy a license wording.

The wording is still misleading because you aren't purchasing immich and if you were, what exactly would you be purchasing? Control of the project? The immich name? You aren't purchasing a license to use it as you already have that. A supporters badge key? Okay well be upfront that that is what you are selling because you aren't selling immich itself.

He's being a dick and suggesting you fix this in immich rather than provide this stop gap workaround. I for one appreciate your diligence in pointing this out as I'd seen no mention of it prior to your first post.