Did you even read the article? They explicitly point out that it was the learned class that was so busy with their other important things that they missed all of it. The whole thing is about how that played out.
They got an estimate for the audit on expired copyrights and media use and though "fuck it". Probably going to monetize and re-release cleared highlights at a later date.
There really is no such thing as 'gamers', any more than there are 'movie-goers' or 'streamers'. Everybody does it. Some demographics will love to tribe up just for the sake of it. Some will just shrug and move on. One of the saddest things about game marketing is how it's still hyper-focused on horny teens.
That said: As long as companies can change their TOS, content or even the availability of their game, the review system should be equally flexible.
>There really is no such thing as 'gamers', any more than there are 'movie-goers' or 'streamers
I do think there are such things as movie-goers and streamers. There is a difference between "I watch a marvel movie a few times a year" and "I watch a few different kinds of movies a month and discuss them at movie club meetings".
We can bikeshed the name but I'm really just talking about enthusiasts who do more than popular consumption within a hobby/medium.The stereotype doesn't matter much to my main point.
>As long as companies can change their TOS, content or even the availability of their game, the review system should be equally flexible.
My point was that review systems are not the place for "flexible" reviews, unless the game itself fundamentally changed. You can make petitions and post on social media and make videos and all that. But I don't think a user review platform is the place for the aforementioned tribalism.
The only reason I'm not fully against it is because consumers shouldn't just base their purchase of products on how popular it is (a literal fallacy in debate). They should be able to read some reviews, see that it useless or tribal to your opinon, and find proper reviews or ways to evaluate media. But that's a bigger societal can of worms to open.
I've been online since the late eighties and over time I've seen some nasty NSFL stuff. I am absolutely certain this has shaped my world view to some degree. Like some other GenX-er said: "Internet is our Vietnam".
> I am absolutely certain this has shaped my world view to some degree
On the other hand many people, if I had to guess I'd say the vast majority, have not seen any of that stuff on the internet. I have, but because I actively went looking for it. Likewise if I ask around amongst friends the only ones who saw the real gore all admitted having actively searched for it. In other words: even before we saw it there might have been something different in our world view already.
It depends how terminally online you are too. Even not actively looking for it, you'll eventually see it. Probably less likely these days than on the wild west internet ~y2k. But visiting enough forums and going to enough personal pages at the time eventually put you in front of some NSFL content. Or at least a link that you didn't actively look for but now have an option of clicking purely out of curiousity.
That's sort of the point though: we do that, but whereas around y2k forums were the online communities, I don't exactly have the impression that is still the case. And it's not like you're going to see much NSFL content on, say, TikTok.
> In other words: even before we saw it there might have been something different in our world view already.
Agreed. I was brought up in a troubled home and spent a lot (if not all) of my childhood/early teens on 4chans /b/ board as a result (mid-late 2000s, early 10s). Looking back at it, it seems like it was THE place that brought together all the damaged individuals.
The stuff I've seen there desensitized me to a basically every disgusting/horrid/tragic thing I had to witness later on in life, other than losses of loved ones in of themselves.
Agreed, there's a stark difference between seeing someone getting decapitated on screen and then closing the tab instead of seeing this IRL and being scared of being the next one in line or realizing that the person standing next to you is just doing this.
This is referring to the "GenX" who watched this out of his own free will, which is also not comparable to what the people in this article have to deal with.
I wonder what they were all doing. Their special apps, like the iWatch, are below par and they are pretty much the last service that doesn't offer HQ audio. AI does most of the editorial playlist generation. What are nearly 10K people doing?
Probably just a fraction of employees are doing software, the bulk of the work is managing contracts, labels, legal compliance in 250 countries, marketing, administration, etc.
Reminds of the quote attributed to Naval Ravikant (paraphrased):
You have one person running the website. They leave and, of course, you need two people to replace that one person. Then, eventually, one of them leaves, you need two people to replace them etc. This brings you to a scenario where you have 5,000 people maintaining the website and changes take years.
AFAIK, it's not actually Electron, but their own tooling using Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF). Also AFAIK, they came up with their solution for this before Electron was even a thing (so before Atom the code editor, which Electron came from).
Some manner of obligation to care for your pet (any pet) should exist. This has nothing to do with religion and is all about honoring the commitment you entered when you decided to take care of an animal.
I have no idea how laws got brought into this conversation but some people absolutely do worship their dogs, as someone who doesn’t really like animals and is highly allergic to pet dander, it’s frankly quite annoying and insane.
I was bitten by a dog once and the owners immediately started trying to explain to me why it was actually my fault that I, standing there minding my own business, made the dog bite me! They eventually remembered that I got bit and asked if I was hurt.
I lived in an apartment building next to some people with a new puppy who barked at night - when I complained to them about it I got an earful about how its ok for them to violate noise ordinances and disturb my sleep, it’s a puppy, it can’t control itself, how could I possibly be so mean!?
I refused an invitation to a party once because they had a lot of dogs and I’m very allergic - I was told I was being super rude and that I should just pop some meds and get over it. I asked them why they expected me to make myself miserable for the dogs sake when they could just kennel it for the weekend?
I own fish - the amount of times someone has told me that my pet is “lame” or “silly” or “boring” and that I should have gotten a dog is ridiculous. Like fuck off.
TL;DR Dog owners can be really obnoxious and self-righteous. There’s a mutual understanding that if people can’t control their children, they are bad parents. But not being able to control your dog is for some reason much more accepted.
You have no idea how laws got brought into the conversation?
Well if there's a law requiring dogs to be physically examined every year and that would be what you call a law... Also people are bringing in stuff about registration and shots and so forth. Those are also called laws
I was confused because no such laws are advocated for nor even suggested in the article, which is what you were replying to in your original comment. It seems like you literally just invented the idea just to be mad about
I think they’re implying the opposite. The world would be destroyed if the total population continues to grow. As of right now, we would need 5 Earths to sustain everyone’s current lifestyle, keeping in mind that more than half the world lives in poverty.
