雨 月

Oh boy, I didn´t know that. What´s the reason of doing it that way though? I mean, since I discovered lemmy, most if not all drama related to lemmy being a good platform came down to the fact that certain instances blocked certain other instances OR even to the question why an instance DIDN´T block another instace that had some right wing shit on it. Seems to me, having your instance simply copy over everything might be more of a liability at this point.

That´s one thing I GENUINELY can´t wrap my head around with lemmy in general. How is it, that the admins of one lemmy instance feel responsible for what gets posted in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT instance to the point they feel the need to keep their own members from even seeing it? It doesn´t reflect negatively on firefox, that they allow me to access piracy sites. It doesn´t reflect negatively on gmail that they allow me to use their email address to subscribe to piracy stuff. Why would it reflect negatively on lemmy.world, if their members also accessed piracy stuff? Are the admins of lemmy.world somehow responsible for what their members do, even if it´s not on their own instance?

People hate them so much that it became the most lucrative way of monetizing games ever.

They were but not as a 3d model. Someone has to actually make that 3d model and it looks like that person was the guy from the article.

IMO, resources like the Megathread create a false sense of security here. People read something on there and think downloading anything from sites on the megathread is absolutely safe. Just like any admin of a torrent site can´t catch anything bad before it can cause any damage, the authors of the megathred also can´t be 100% aware of each and every upload on every one of the sites featured there.

Just use your brains guys. We´re talking about piracy here after all!

In the baking? This literally came up the second this situation arose. People jumped from “This upload has a miner” via “People got banned for reporting it” to “The proceeds from the miner go directly to the admins” within one single post. And all most people had to say was “Well, where do I go now?”.

Same here. My children, mainly my daughter, use Netflix MUCH more than my wife and I. So the “just pirate the stuff” doesn´t really apply. If I want to see a specific movie or series, sure. But my kids don´t even watch with the intention of finishing a series or whatever. They browse and watch what catches their eye. That can´t be easily done with pirated stuff. And for me and my wife, it´s kinda similar. We don´t have the time or interrest to watch that many movies. Most of the time, we have like an hour to spare, we plop down on the couch, browse through what new cooking or duocumentaries there are and just watch something.

Now, at the moment, we still use a friends account. Seems like the “Kids” profile still works and on mobile everything still works fine. But as soon as that´s over, I can´t promise that I won´t have to get my own account…as much as it saddens me.

It´s just as dumb as any sort of stickers that convey your personal opinion.

Most people won´t care, very few will appreciate it but if there´s only one person that really really hates it, you might end up with a keyed car.

Yeah, It´s kinda fucked up since normally, competition is good for the customer. It´s a good thing to have different stores you can go to. It´s a cood thing to have different car or moobile phone brands to chose from.

With streaming though, I can´t really think of any real world situation where the customer actually is worse off with more variety to chose from.

You are aware that we are in a piracy group here, right? We don´t want our money back. Because we didn´t pay for it in the first place!

What does this have to do with laws though? I find it pretty reasonable for a film company to be able or allowed to run their own streaming platform and just not sell their shows to say netflix. If I create something that I want to sell my self, in my own store, there should be no law forcing me to also hand it over to that supermarket down the streat to sell it there. And if I want to charge a monthly fee for even being able to enter my own little store, that should also not be prohibited.

Imagine there would be a law that said, every studio would also have to sell their stuff to netflix. You think, Netflix wouldn´t immediately abuse this power to drive any competition out of business?

Don´t get me wrong, I HATE that to be able to watch all the stuff I might be interrested in, I´d have to subscribe to like 5 different services. I just don´t see how laws would be a good tool to deal with that.

That´s on my “want to read” list.

That´s so insane, right? I mean, they practically had us in the bag with netflix. People either had their own account or chipped in to use someone elses one BUT EITHER WAY, THEY PAID FOR IT! And then came one of the rare moments where more competition was actually bad.

What WAS their next cash grab though?

Good Idea. It’s widely accepted that cognitive capabilities can decline rapidly with old age. It simply makes no sense that a person that needs 8 tries and 10 minutes to change the station on their TV is still allowed to operate a two ton death machine without any checks in place.

The important part here is to make it so that it ONLY “catches” declined driving capabilities and is not also biased in terms of social and financial status or maybe if you’re an immigrant or something.