Gabe is literally practising Noblesse Oblige, which is really funny but really shows that our billionare society is really just a reduction to old aristocracy. He's just the good Duke, whereas most Dukes are horrible, horrible people.
Noblesse oblige exists because of a moral economy. You can be a horrible Duke, because there's no real reward for being the good one.
This is not that - Steam has to compete on the free market, there is a reward for making the product everyone else refuses to make. In a post-Deck world, it's hard to believe that moral obligation plays a bigger role than the overall hatred of Windows for seamless gaming experiences.
"A complement is a product that you usually buy together with another product. Gas and cars are complements. Computer hardware is a classic complement of computer operating systems. And babysitters are a complement of dinner at fine restaurants."
Gamers are a passionate bunch. Screwing around with them is a losing game that no one has historically ever won. And also because a lot of their competitors fucked up to pave the road for them (Think Sony's PS fiasco, Microsoft's X-Box clusterfuck from which they're yet to recover from, a decade later). Valve has gotten alot of billion dollar lessons in here that Valve got for free.
> every publisher with more than one game has their own launcher (usually shitty and brings no value)
I view this as a positive -- it's not feasible to maintain a build for every game and storefront's DRM/auth (unless you go DRM-free, which is the ideal but not something publishers and developers do on release). A launcher is the layer that sits between -- the games are written to auth against a launcher, and the launcher has builds for each storefront.
Otherwise you're just further entrenching Steam as the de facto monopoly on sales.
My problem with launchers other than steam and galaxy from GOG: usually shitty and brings no value.
Paradox launcher is alright for example, it adds value in form of mod preset managment and ability to launch straight into saved game.
What ever is in
dune: awakening" exists just to tell me about their other games and as a result make game launching longer than it needs to be. Not only that it adds A LOT of friction when I launch it via Remote Play with a controller.
Point is: if you make a launcher make sure it adds any value and not just an advertisementr billboard.
As for store fronts: steam by far has the most functionality among PC storefronts.
Don't sugarcoat it. Valve has to make sure this is advertised as a PC to keep the licensing good on the games you've bought and that they are allowed to sell. Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony have closed ecosystems with their consoles. Well, Microsoft seems to be throwing in the towel on consoles.
The Blu-Ray drive is basically no added cost since the games were already distributed on optical disks, it’s like how the PS2 was one of the most popular DVD players. The problem with the Xbone was that, at least judging on their marketing at the time, Microsoft was far more focused on broadening the scope of the device beyond games while Sony stayed focused on gaming. That’s why I bought a PS4 despite previously using an Xbox 360.
Xbox One/PS4 is when both sides standardized on BluRay.
When Xbox360 and PS3 came out, the format war was only just starting, and the consoles were on either side of it.
PS3 came with a BluRay drive and the games were delivered on BluRay.
Xbox360 came with software support for HDDVD, but the actual disk reader hardware was a DVD reader (famously, a large off-the-shelf part selected at the last minute that required a redesign of the cooling system to accomodate its size), and the HDDVD drive was an optional add-on that nobody bought.
The fact that every PS3 could read BluRay, but you needed a special extra to play HDDVD on Xbox 360 is arguably the main reason BluRay won the format war.
Which is probably why Microsoft decided to focus so much on media features for the Xbone. What they should have considered was that they had won the Xbox 360 generation by being a better game platform; it should really be no skin off Microsoft’s back that Blu-Ray won the format war.
> it’s like how the PS2 was one of the most popular DVD players
I worked for a Sony dealer when the PS2 launched, and they wouldn't give us one :-/
What I thought at the time was insane was that they were still selling a 200-disc carousel CD changer, and DVD version of the same thing (same box, different shade of silver grey, different drive mechanism, two chips different on the PCB) - but they had no plans to sell a 200-disc carousel PS2.
Imagine if you could have had all your movies, audio CDs, PSX, and shiny new PS2 games in one big box, tucked away out of sight, with your spiffy new 576p projector and 5.1 speakers hooked up to it!
Microsoft lost the console wars. Their new generation (Series S & X) sold almost 1/4 of what PS5 did because they basically don't have any exclusive game that you can only play in their hardware. Microsoft invested heavily in their Gamepass subscription (that has more than 35 million users) and they believe that the future is on PC. The newest xbox hardware, a handheld made by Asus, is a PC running windows. The next generation of xbox hardware that will compete with the PS6 will also very likely be a PC. The xbox console is dead.
Back in the 1980s you got your Mom to buy you a game console and you would have needed a logical naming scheme so she would know an PS 3 was better than a PS 2.
XBOX cultivates a "gamer" who is heavily invested in the identity and is well educated in the various versions of XBOX and how the naming scheme works and since they are an adult buying the console for themselves they don't need to explain it to outsiders.
sure i guess if you only want money from adults born in the 80s maybe it seems like an okay idea. abandon the market of humans born after the year 2000, should be fine.
Even before they muddied things with reusing the S and X names for completely different things, "Xbox One" was bad enough
I worked at a pawn shop when that console generation kicked off. One day a guy called in and asked if he could bring in his Xbox One. "Of course," I told him, until I had to turn him away because it was an original Xbox.
In theory you can run all your GamesPass games on a Steam Machine in the same way you can run arbitrary games through Proton, which is what Steam is doing.
What a wild world it would be, if Microsoft release a GamesPass client for linux so it can try and get a slice of all this new linux gaming happening on SteamOS.
In theory you can, in practice Game Pass games are distributed in such a way only Windows can run them. You can use Game Pass Streaming which is fine when at home, and entirely useless when on a train using a Steam Deck.
The ideal would be MS just selling Game Pass subscriptions via Steam but I expect we'll see that happen shortly after hell freezes over.
I feel like everyone lost the "console wars". Sony is not doing much better considering almost all of their former exclusives are on steam these days. Those next-gen Xboxes will have access to those sony games at discount pricing.
> Sony is not doing much better considering almost all of their former exclusives are on steam these days.
I still can't wrap my head around why they decided to do this considering they were in a pretty killer position coming out of the PS4 generation. I mean, it's probably a positive for consumers to have more options for platforms, so I won't exactly complain. But I do want PlayStation to stick around as a strong competitor because fierce competition is best for consumers in the long-term.
At first it seemed like they were just porting the previous game in a series when the sequel came out exclusively on PS5, as a way to get people into the series and then making them buy their console to play the next game. But now it seems like there's barely any wait between when one of Sony's exclusives comes to PS5 and the PC launch afterwards. If Sony is confused as to why the PS5 isn't selling up to expectations, the answer to that seems pretty obvious to me.
Also they state that the console will remain the centerpiece, they want to make Xbox a "platform" to reuse their own term. It becomes an ecosystem rather than a hardware product. They idea is that as long as you have a gamepass, you can play on whatever you want - except macOS and Linux...
To be fair there are a lot of games on Steam that don't have DRM, which means you can just drag them out of the steamapps folder to a computer that doesn't have Steam and they work fine. The decision to add DRM comes from the developer/publisher, not Valve.
GOG is hardly a toy and is the platform I look to purchase tons of games on instead of Steam (which I really like) and definitely over Epic (which I've never even installed)
Only drm free steam games. The ones with the steam drm require steam client to be running to launch (steam itself can be in offline mode but it still needs to be running)
Games using things like steam input might also require steam to be running so there is some drm free games that might not run also. Some of those will if you move them outside the steam folder / rename Steam.exe. If you leave them in the steam folder the game will start steam for you if when you launch it.
I think that's the point. The GP post basically said, "Gamers can't be messed with." A child post gave a ton of examples of how gamers are messed with, and this comment helps cement that. It does beg the question as to why Steam isn't as evil as it could be but does choose to be as evil as they are. To me (a very casual gamer) they do seem like the least evil.
Also don't knock those zip files purchased off of itch.io. Sometimes it's good to visit a cottage industry to see what's passing under the radar of the big guys.
I think that's more a situation where publishers demand some form of DRM so steam is trying to provide a default solution that most publishers are happy with.
Because they're not owned by private equity/publicly traded. If that ever happens the "let's squeeze this for every dime it's worth" will happen.
That's really the saddest thing about capitalism, if everything around us wasn't getting enshittified in the exact same way at least the future would be more alluring.
It is nice to see people bucking the trend getting rewarded, I see a bright future for an open ecosystem for gaming (even ignoring the Steam announcements).
That is true for all media purchases since the invention of copyright in 1662.
You think you own the Silmarillion because you have a paper copy? Hah! No, you have a transferrable license to read it.
Every hard copy movie you have starts with a big green FBI warning reminding you that having that disc does not means you own the movie, it means you have a transferrable license to play it for yourself and small groups on small screens.
Digital media with DRM allow content distributors to remove the "transferrable" part of the license if they want, which often allows them to sell for cheaper since they know that each sale represents only one person recieving the experience. The license comes with less rights (no transferrance), so it can be priced lower.
Most media for me is a one and done. A book, a movie, a computer game. Granted a computer games version of "done" might mean "played on and off for a year".
There are exceptions to this - books I read again, shows I'd watch again, but games seem to age poorly by comparison. Original Syndicate or Deus Ex - while playable - is not what I remember it to be and I'd rather keep the nostalgic memories than shatter them with a replay.
This rarity of exceptions means that I wouldn't lose much if my Steam account disappeared - mainly just "whatever I'm playing now". Create a new account and go again, or buy off GOG or something.
However in return for using Steam I get a lot of convenience - updates, propogated save files, easy chat and "Right click -> Join Game" with friends. That "Right click -> Join Game" is almost worth it on it's own for ease of social gaming.
I would like to see change there for sure. That said, DRM is optional for publishers on Steam. Once you've downloaded a game without DRM (steam's or otherwise) you can back it up and play it without Steam.
What made you go with comparing things to 2004? Seems random, there is so much that is different in the Linux ecosystem generally, Valve just put the situation on a rocket and shot it into space.
Point taken, it really is marvelous! When I was running Gentoo Linux, and Windows 2000 back then I never thought things would be so portable and simple!
If copying isn’t theft then I guess we can stop worrying about open source licensing. Anyone, including corporations, would be able to take open source code and copy it into their own products, reselling it without consent or releasing their changes because they haven’t stolen anything, just copied it, right?
If you spend years of your life writing some software and then it accidentally gets revealed to the world by mistake, anyone can copy it and use it as their own? Because copying isn’t theft, theft they haven’t stolen anything from you, so you have nothing to complain about?
Of course, if you give people fewer incentives to share their information they can and often will simply keep it private. You can't copy information that people never gave to you, regardless of the law.
I can't tell if you're sarcastically describing the world we live in or if you genuinely haven't realized all these things happen regularly. Poe's law I guess.
A pretty big part of theft is the victim no longer having whatever is stolen. When I steal your car, phone, bike or milk, you no longer have it, and no longer enjoy the benefit of it. I'm fairly certain that's the part of theft most people have a problem with. If I zap your car and produce a perfect duplicate, and drive that duplicate away, leaving your car as if nothing had ever happened, other than minutiae like the VINs and licence plates being identical, I cannot imagine anyone having a problem with that. Nobody is going to call that theft. If you still believe that's theft, then I cannot understand where you're coming from.
This does not hold true for copyright infringement. When I copy Die Hard 3: The Expendables' Return of the Jedi, the original owner/copyright holder still has it. As they still have it, I have not deprived them of their work or good, and calling it theft makes about as much sense as me making a copy of the milk in your fridge and taking that copy.
Nah, the people who pretend that definitions in a criminal law book override natural linguistics are being deliberately obtuse. Language exists mostly outside of a courtroom.
Given that identity fraud leads directly into what is functionally actual theft (taking money out of you bank account or taking up loans in your name and scarpering), there's no wonder the term's confused. Doesn't make it theft though.
It isn't legally theft, but because people commonly use the word that way, it is colloquially theft. The qualifications are different. Legal crimes are defined by law. English is defined by its common use. They're not necessarily the same thing.
Just as many wiki's are called Wikipedias, by analogy with the biggest ones; that is, they aren't. Or maybe more fitting here, the word 'download', which can mean data transfer or modification in pretty much any way with a person not knowledgeable about computers.[1] Those uses aren't uncommon, but they are nevertheless wrong.
I think you just finished a circle there, so I don't think there's much reason to continue this line of enquiry, given neither of us is going to change our stance.
Preventing someone from getting value out of their work is theft - not matter how it is done. Copying a dead person's work isn't theft because a dead person can't create value, but stealing a dead person's car is still theft, because something of value is gone.
Stealing a car you were never going to buy and making an exact replica of a car you were never going to buy is two entirely different things.
"IP theft" is not counter to that definition. Intellectual property is a 'something'. That definition, does not require depriving someone else of something. As another valid example, see "identity theft".
Furthermore, English is not prescriptive; dictionaries are a lagging reference of observed use... so yes, the users of English absolutely do get to redefine language. That's how all modern English words originated.
And finally, if your dictionary doesn't account for "IP theft", you have simply found an incorrect dictionary, because that usage is undeniably widespread -- whether or not you agree with the concept politically.
Between these two pages, you should be able to understand why "ip theft" is a bogus term. It's specifically called out in the intellectual property article.
"Unlike other forms of property, intellectual property can be used by infinitely many people without depriving the original owner of the use of their property."
Whereas theft has this definition:
"Theft is the taking of another person’s personal property with the intent of depriving that person of the use of their property."
My not-a-lawyer understanding is that we use a common law system in the USA. This means that the definitions for things are based on history, previous cases, and the statutes that have been codified into law. This is a good thing because redefining words can make previously legal actions become illegal. Allowing that to happen at the pace slang develops in the modern era means we will hold people to different standards based on how "hip" they are.
I said you don’t get to redefine what words mean unilaterally. I disagree that enough English speakers agree with the MPA definition for us to adopt it. I sure don’t.
Good thing I don't recognise the existence of that. We live in a society that does, and I despise that. At least the EU has the sense to not recognise software patents, so 'intellectual property' is not all-encompassing. Maybe one day they can loosen the grip further.
> As another valid example, see "identity theft".
'Identity fraud' is a much better term for what this is. Someone using my name, phone number and my mother's maiden name to get money in my name is not stealing my name and phone number; it's just fraud. It's much closer to lying than stealing.
English is not a programming language. You're only disagreeing with my articulation here, which is irrelevant in relation to the thing of the matter - namely what I mean rather than what I type into the keyboard physically.
What is with this wave of Text User Interface applications everywhere; and why does dev go through this type of cycle so often? Is it just new gen type behavior, so around 2030 we'll see a new wave of whatever and whatever?
I refuse to be old man who yells at clouds, but I think just like the new gen can't help what comes, neither can I. I just feel so old sometimes because most of the "new ideas" aren't really at all; they just have a different language to describe the same thing.
Lots of language have pretty good tools for making TUIs.
There's a good ratio between the time it takes to implement a TUI and its usefulness.
Writing a GUI with equivalent functionality would typically be a lot more work, with no gains at all. Er, except maybe touchscreen and touch-gesture support, none of which would add any value for this kind of tool.
> Writing a GUI with equivalent functionality would typically be a lot more work, with no gains at all.
I disagree. Have you used something like tkinter? It's ridiculously easy to build GUIs. The trouble is if you build a GUI that way it will look kinda beige/crap whereas a TUI looks retro (but looks even worse to non-nerds).
So there’s another issues with GUIs, they might be fine on Xorg and have issues on Wayland (or viceversa). TUIs all work as long as your terminal emulator works.
No one ever said TUIs are a new thing. It's been there since the beginning, when programs explicitly ran on terminals before WWW took off. It's the bloated web which ruined a lot of things
The level of knee-jerk reaction to anything Rust into traditionally C projects borders on the pathological. That email is about as polite as it gets without being coddling.
Do keep in mind that a lot of the people involved in these sorts of things are neurodiverse in some ways, and may have significant trouble dealing with change.
As teh64 helpfully pointed out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45784445 some hours ago, 4ish years ago my position on this was a total 360 and I'd have had the same reaction to now-me's proposal.
All these changes requires work. Because of this, other priorities will get less attention. It would be ironic if bad security flaws are missed/introduced because of all the work switching to Rust. Its also very likely that all the new code written in Rust will be far less mature than the existing source bases. So the outcome might be (very probably actually) a lot of work to worsen security.
Most of the academic research into these sorts of typesafe languages usually returns the null result (if you don't agree, it means you haven't read the research on this topic). That's researcher for it didn't work and you shouldn't be using these techniques. Security is a process, not a silver bullet and 'just switch to Rust' is very silvery bullet.
It's not like I'm in a hurry to switch to Rust and will spend full steam on it. It's amongst the lowest priority items.
A lot of the Rust rewrites suffer a crucial issue: they want a different license than what they are rewriting and hence rewrite from scratch because they can't look at the code.
But here we're saying: Hey we have this crucial code, there may be bugs hidden in it (segfaults in it are a recurring source of joy), and we'll copy that code over from .cc to .rs and whack it as little as possible so it compiles there.
The problem is much more there on the configuration parser for example which does in a sense desparately need a clean rewrite, as it's way too sloppy, and it's making it hard to integrate.
In an optimal world I'd add annotations to my C++ code and have a tool that does the transliteration to Rust at the end; like when the Go compiler got translated from C to Go. It was glorious.
So I'm running Pixel 6a with GrapheneOS beta updates, I'm okay? Tho if law enforcement needs in my phone they just need to hold me until after lunch, I get pretty hungry. And those Doritos and coke they offered me sure looks tasty...
Technically, the upgrade to the Pixel 8 (or higher) would be security-wise a lot better, because they offer more memory safety (MTE), but yeah you are probably good.
Google is definitely not doing nothing. A lot of smart people are there who work very hard.
But, as a Google employee for about a decade at this point, I really do think that the company is trash when it comes to planning and coordination and is getting worse at it over time. I think that there are a lot of things it never really needed to learn how to do because the ads money is just so outrageous.
Like the resource curse for companies that stumble on a cash spigot. Still, maybe that's fine, because they wouldn't exist otherwise. Just don't expect too much from them outside that?
I wish they'd just spin out more companies so they could rise or fall on their own.
That only happens when you have your own data center. That's a whole different issue and most people with their own hardware don't have their own data centers as it's not particularly cost efficient except at incredibly large scale.
