Stop living in a dumbass fucking filter bubble.

Blocking is for people who are abusive, not people who coherently express a point slightly different then the one you made.

And they are literally unquestionably and objectively right. Literally every single tool ever created was made to reduce the amount of labour it takes to do a task, which reduces the value of human labour. It’s called automation. Read Karl Marx if you think you’re such a leftist, he’ll explain it you.

🤔

On the Voyager app you can see that it wasn’t edited at all.

That really does not matter. Spend some time camping with no phones and notice how differently you feel and behave. Humans did not evolve to have smartphones and social media, it triggers numerous emotional responses without actually satisfying them, by its inherent nature.

Social media. You use it up spending time on Reddit and Lemmy etc.

If that description is accurate then there’s nothing unprofessional about that.

What would be unprofessional in that situation is the original devs not doing their jobs and then allowing a fan backlash to grow.

Again, we don’t know the reality of the situation. I think everyone would be curious to hear from other devs at the studio that aren’t part of management or the three who were fired but we haven’t yet.

I do, I don’t trust the outraged opinions of people using the outrage machine.

They did not have any reason to personally attack the leads except out of spite,

Lol what the honest fuck are you talking about?

They were facing a boycott because it seemed like they fired the original creators to avoid paying the employees.

They could have issued a statement saying that they would still pay the remaining employees and everyone would assume that they still fired the creators out of greed reasons. If the creators actually didn’t do their jobs, then they would want to make it clear that they are the ones actually committed to making a good game and this has nothing to do with greed.

That may not be the case, but at present we simply do not know what the reality of the situation was.

That’s not why people get outraged, they get outraged because it’s addictive and they spend too much time on social media.

To be fair, they didn’t trash anyone publicly until they basically had to.

Happiness comes from acceptance, not obsession.

Neither will harm or effect your baby in any measurable way.

What will effect them measurably negatively is having obsessive parents who min/max every decision rather than being happy and enjoying their child.

Happiness comes from acceptance, not obsession.

Perhaps so, but isn’t that up to whoever creates the information?

No, what I’m saying is that at a fundamental physics level, information is inherently abundant in a way that nothing else made of matter or energy is. There is effectively zero cost to replicating it an infinite amount of times. That is fundamentally not true for anything made of energy or matter.

If you invent a story, why would you not be entitled to own it?

Why would you “own” it? If you tell a story what prevents me from also telling that story? The threat of you punching me if I tell my own copy when you’re not around? That’s not owning something that’s unilaterally declaring that you own all copies of something and forever own all copies of it going forward. If I invent a white t shirt, should I be able to claim ownership of every white t-shirt that anyone makes forever? That’s nonsense.

For much of human history, artistry of all sorts has been a profession, as much as a hobby. The idea of attribution and ownership over one’s art has been a core part of why that has worked and allowed creators to thrive.

Completely and utterly wrong.

Because no, the idea of ownership of a song has virtually never been important to art. Professional artists, in the time periods where they have existed, have largely been able to because they would be constantly performing art in the era prior to recordings, and they would constantly be performing other people’s songs that they did not write themselves or they would add their own twists to it.

A song like House of the Rising Sun can be traced all the way back to 16th century English hymns before eventually winding it’s way through countless Appalachian and travelling singers, before being picked up by 50s era folk musicians, before being picked up by a British rock band called the Animals. This is how music has worked through literally all of human history until the abomination that is copyright.

Hell it wasn’t until the classical music era, and the rise of sheet music that you actually started seeing real authorship granted to individual people, and even in that era you didn’t own a song, if someone like Mozart could listen and transcribe it then they could also perform it themselves.

I would argue that the alternative of having no such system at all would ultimately lead to less art and information being created and shared at all, if the creation process is unsustainable at an individual creator’s level.

Yeah, well it’s a good thing there are lots of alternatives to copyright that aren’t ‘no system at all’.

which are both equally absurd and not really worth dissecting further.

Try having a conversation without resorting to thought terminating cliches.

And if that’s what you took out of it you missed the point. And given the number of dismissive thought terminating cliches you keep using it does not seem like you actually care to learn or are having a good faith discussion.

If you are, you’ve missed the point, which is that information, at a fundamental, physics level, does not behave the same way as energy and matter. Computers make it essentially free to replicate information infinitely. That is not true for any physical good. The differences therein mean that information should be abundant, except that copyright and DRM create artificial scarcity where there is no need for it.

I’ve only been pointing out that copyright is dumb, not that piracy is wholly justified.

We got into this corner because you ignored the actual points I made about why copyright is dumb (read: a scarcity based system is not suitable for digital information since it is inherently unscarce) and focused on the age of copyright instead.

Oh, wow. I’m so impressed.

It’s existed since the time of the transatlantic slave trade.

Surely that makes it something human and good!

Totally compares to the previous 2.75 Million years of story telling culture and tradition. Totally not just an exploitative artifact of the corporate age. /S

And go ahead and cite your favourite book on copyright. Maybe I’ll read it.

It is 100% correct. There was no concept of owning a story or a song just because you told it first, throughout literally all of history until the copyright laws of the 20th century.

And my point is that the literal entirety of human culture is based on a tradition of storytelling, something copyright expressly forbids.

Copyright is not a system that aligns with our natural inclinations or the way we evolved. It’s a crude, child like attempt to cram information into a capitalist mold that doesn’t work.

,You can say “I think intellectual property is a dumb idea” and I’d love to hear your arguments for that,

Read the above comments then.

but to act like it isn’t real just because we came up with the idea relatively recently, is just asinine.

Again, read my comments. I didn’t say it wasn’t real, I said it has no basis in human culture or history.

Is the 30B calculated before or after Oracle arbitrarily increases their pricing for no reason?

K, versus 2,750,000 years.

Here’s 300 letter g’s:

gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggg

Here’s 2.75 million letter h’s

Oh wait, I can’t paste that many because at 40 chars per line, it would be 68,000 lines long, or 1000x the Android clipboard’s char limit.

You are literally describing a meaningless iota in the course of human history.