To keep their membership in WTO. Even if the US exerts massive influence over WTO it’s still the only general trade agreement most countries recognise.

Hard drive in PS4 is user-replaceable so at least there’s that. Putting even the cheapest SATA SSD decreases load times considerably too which should help in stretching its lifespan a bit.

So you don’t see a problem with Valve’s solution not being a solution to everyone being locked in their platform. Valve monopoly is based on their gatekeeper status to the defacto industry standard game ownership ledger.

You must have loved Internet Explorer.

Dude, you’re beyond help. Steam keys are a form of locking you in Steam. People are lazy, the main reason they don’t buy outside of Steam is because they like everything in one place. Valve knows this, hence their line „just resell keys” is plain malicious and you’re just doing free PR for Gabe.

Tell me what could be the precise reason for delisting Crysis 2 from Steam? Why is developers agreement with another party any consideration at all? If Apple delisted someone because their product was cheaper on an alternative to app store would that be ok? I’m sure it would cause an outrage and they’re not even a monopoly, unlike Valve.

Why not filter them out? Doesn’t Lemmy have this functionality? I filter out „could” and „might”.

Circular logic, no? Devs have to kneecap themselves by limiting their reach to stores with 5% cumulative market share or accept everything Valve wants. Take a look at this and see what happens when a big publisher goes against them:

https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/-i-crysis-2-i-removed-from-steam

EA has issued a response to the game’s removal, saying that it was “not an EA decision or the result of any action by EA,” saying instead that the game was removed because an agreement that developer Crytek made with “another download service” violates an unspecified rule Steam has for its distribution partners. Valve has not responded to requests by Gamasutra for clarification. An EA spokesperson provided this statement to Gamasutra: “It’s unfortunate that Steam has removed Crysis II from their service. This was not an EA decision or the result of any action by EA. Steam has imposed a set of business terms for developers hoping to sell content on that service – many of which are not imposed by other online game services. Unfortunately, Crytek has an agreement with another download service which violates the new rules from Steam and resulted in its expulsion of Crysis II from Steam. Crysis II continues to be available on several other download services including Amazon, GameStop and Origin.com.”]

Steam keys means everything still happens in their store, with users attached to the platform without a way out. This is not a serious answer.

Steam is a monopoly because of their massive market share, that’s all there is to it, having irrelevant competition doesn’t matter in this case. You think monopoly = bad and therefore Steam can’t be a monopoly. That’s not how it works.

Go gaslight someone else.

If you live in a country that makes telecoms monitor traffic then those have a benefit of not requiring a VPN (because you’re not uploading anything and they usually go for those seeding).

You mean that people who came up with those laws, as a consequence of monopolies abusing their power, were delusional. Take a step back to think what’s more likely.

You’re missing the point.

Valve can’t enforce prices across other store by mandating they can’t be cheaper because they’re a monopolist. If this part of their agreement is true then they are out of the line, in breach of law, and should be punished. Being a monopoly isn’t illegal, how Valve got there doesn’t matter. Their behaviour as a monopolist matters. It’s literally the law in most civilised countries and those laws come from the times when people didn’t simp for monopolies.

Scala is essentially Java so most of Java criticism applies.

And Valve has to remove abusive clauses from their agreements with the devs so that it can actually happen, yes.

Allegedly they can’t because confidential agreement prevents them. And they won’t move away from Steam because it’s a monopoly. Which is why this is illegal.

I thought only the most miserable data engineers are using it.

It’s anticompetitive when you have 90% market share and you do this. Monopolies are generally legal but can’t do certain things regular companies can.

1. There’s nothing mandatory about those apps. Facebook and Pornhub are optional and more friction in using them won’t hurt. All I’m saying is that massive platforms that allow a massive reach need to verify that their users are who they claim to be. I don’t think it should apply to small forums like Lemmy. Making people spread into smaller communities would be an added benefit.
2. There is no invasion of privacy if zero knowledge proof protocol is used to verify that user is a national and not underage because nobody needs to know any other data points. Phone and internet are not human rights.

It’s very hard to get fired in France, it’s one of the main reasons nobody bought Ubi outright yet - there’s thousands of people making big €€€ that can’t be replaced by cheap labour in Eastern Europe or Southeast Asia.

One has to weight what has a higher societal cost and if one has a choice at all if we want our societies to survive. Participation in big tech social media and watching porn is not a human right.

Plenty of EU countries have digital ID apps already and provide services like signing documents using that ID. Adding something like zero-knowledge proof with passkeys-like UI probably isn’t that much harder than putting people on the moon.

I’d love if every mass social media was required to provide „this is an actual verified human behind this account” flag on every account because we’re about to face an age where trust is the most valuable currency around.