Sparking

That also helps linux. Tried watching something on someone else’s peacock account logged into Linux, and got an error. Checked Google to see if it was available. A free site had it, in better quality streaming too! We ended up using her computer, but I was kind of amazed.

Hey, that robotics nerd was me! I hung out with the book nerds on senior skip day, they were pretty cool.

What are you talking about? I can’t find anything to back this up, but I am curious. Their about page claims they are funded by patreon donations, and doesn’t mention cloudflare anywhere.

Is it just that they use cloudflare services for traffic control, or they host on cloudflare? Especially if it is the former, that is pretty inane.

Isn’t the main issue not so much what they will show, but what gets monetized or not? There is always going to be a disconnect with this stuff because twitch wants the content that goes viral to be advertiser friendly.

Antenna pod is great. I switched to it from google podcasts a couple months ago figuring this would happen.

What right does valve have to discriminate against devs and publishers who are selling their game on other platforms? They have to compete for their business, not punish them for having a game that is more successful on another store that gives a higher revenue cut to the dev and a lower price to the customer.

David Rosen of Wolfire Games (Receiver, Overgrowth, Lugaru) is alleging that steam reps have threatened to de-list his game if he lists it as less expensive on other platforms. Specifically not just steam keys but other distribution platforms.

Right. Valve is claiming they didn’t, and that they only demand price parity for steam keys. So it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Honestly, I am not sure what game valve would play to do this. Devs could just make a red and green version of their game to sell on different platforms and price them differently. Meanwhile, to customers, a games price is a games price and developer publisher and distributor are always incentivized to find the highest price a customer is willing to pay through game theory. The market has definitely proven that customers don’t care about what percentage of the cut goes to devs. So there is no incentive for anyone to post a game at a lower price than what a customer is wiling to pay on steam as long as steam retains the highest volume. Telling devs to not price the way they want seems very counter productive to being a good retailer, so who knows.

It doesn’t matter. The suit is alleging that valve threatened to ban games if they were cheaper on other stores. Thats monopolistic price manipulation, and it’s illegal. Valve even pro.ises not to do this in its terms of service - their price parity policy is only supposed to apply to steam keys. That would be fair, because otherwise they couldn’t give out keys in the first place. But you can’t force devs to list games at the same price and then decide on the cut you will take if you are a monopoly. They will have to prove Valve violated its ToS.

There is andiffefence between saying that scam call centers are bad and that Indians have a culture of scamming. Thats all.

This is kind of racist though. Indian citizens don’t choose to be scammers in a way that Europeans don’t. Its a natural consequence of the countries establishment of business services combined with widespread systemic poverty. This traces back to international business deals, political and economic circumstances. It’s not a cultural thing.

It doesn’t mean that scam call centers are good. But Indians have definitely been exploited by international business. Only natural that they end up returning the favor.

This is the whole point of federation, having multiple instances, and being open source. It’s also why a bunch of the people on here are Linux heads.

Keep on mind that lemmy isn’t owned by a single corporation ir organization. It is a bunch of individually owned instances that talk to each other. This means that if you own an instance, you have contr of how it is moderated, but you have to balance that freedom with making your instance a place other instances will have to connect to. Its very democratic.

This goes all the way to the source code, which is open. So, even if the devs try to change it and exert more control, it could be forked.

Of course, you could still be a doomer and say something could come along and ruin it. But, it’s at least better than private, venture funded internet platforms on paper.

Jared Kushner very openly accepted 2 Billion in Saudi investment the receives 25 million annual fees from, and whose collaborative policy has led to a once in a generation international crisis. It’s very goofy,

I’m not super familiar with the goals of the mint project. But this is generally a bad approach to take with project development. Even if you plan on offering LTS, it is always preferable to have users on the most up to date version. Going through the pain of supporting multiple versions of commercial software at work has taught me that lesson the (very) hard way.

I’m going to say it (and eat the downvotes): Unity devs have become entitled, and kinda deserve the new Unity pricing structure.

Supporting more and more devices and functionality of c# on weirder and weirder runtimes. It is a mountain of dev work that Unity is paying for and subsidizing for your game. If there was an open source effort to make a unified c# runtime across all platforms that would be one thing, but it will always be front run by new features releasing to .NET so it will never exist.

Changing an existing agreement for pricing without any warning is gross. But something had to give eventually. I would have told you that 10 years ago.

The way I would perceive it is that mega-hjts in games are very profitable. A hit sells like 200k-300k at launch. But from time to time, a game hits the cultural zeitgeist and can 3x that. Those are you’re BOTWs and such.

Platforms bank on having those because they are the big bang for their buck. In Microsoft case, an exclusive like that would move a lot of gp subs. I think that is the idea behind making starfield elusive, and then getting rid of the reduced price trial.

So when people are busy playing BG3, and then ign gives starfield a 7, and people decide its not worth dropping everything to go and play, it can really mess up a company’s tire venue projections. Poor babies.