Nibodhika

@Nibodhika@lemmy.world

Profil ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.

Nibodhika,

That read exactly as a footnote on a Terry Pratchett book, if you have never read Discworld you should, it has the same sense of humor that you do. For example another popular saying being bastardized:

Give a man a fire and he’ll be warm for a night. Set a man on fire and he’ll be warm for the rest of his life."

Nibodhika,

Wait are we arguing that the owner of something isn’t entitled more than someone who bought it?

FTFY. The problem is not with Nintendo being against emulators because of piracy, they’re against emulators even if you own the game and the hardware but want to preserve the hardware (just like they do in the museum).

And if the counter-argument is that you don’t own the game when you buy it, then by that same logic you don’t steal it when you pirate it.

Nibodhika,

With it, you can use your Xbox controller to move around the screen and type.

Does that mean you couldn’t before? Seriously people were playing around on a handheld that couldn’t even type?

Button accelerators are also available; these include the X button for backspace and the Y button for the spacebar.

WTF!? Isn’t that standard also?

For better movement patterns, the keyboard keys are aligned vertically."

Does this even make a difference?

In any case, the title is bullshit, it should be that will make windows handhelds close to typing on consoles which sucks. Typing on the Deck is a completely different experience, one that can’t be replicated in any of these handhelds because they lack the hardware to do so.

Nibodhika,

No, watching a gameplay won’t give you the same experience. Keep avoiding spoilers, it is really best experienced blind, although knowing there is something to experience might weaken it.

Nibodhika,

But then the same is also true for Steam

Nibodhika,

This is what you said:

While that may be partly true, (also likely) depending on the county you’re located, they’re not able to revoke the license though.

The same is true for Steam, laws are laws

So in this specific case you having the files makes a world of difference.

You also have the files if you downloaded them on Steam. What’s important is whether those files can be used on their own or if they’re protected by some form of DRM. If the files can be used on their own it doesn’t matter if you got them from Steam, GoG or a physical disc. If on the other hand the files are DRM protected you having them is useless, whoever controls the DRM controls your files, again regardless of where you got the files from.

Nibodhika,

Also I forgot to reply to this on the other answer, but:

Err… You often don’t have the files drm free on Steam. Nor in an installable format (without steam).

Often you do, and an installer is nothing more than a fancy zipped folder. Also people usually like to compare Steam with GoG and claim that on GoG you get DRM free games and not on Steam, that is not true, both have either, although GoG has percentually more it’s still not 100% DRM free (nor is Steam 100% DRMd), it’s always up to the game developers.

Nibodhika,

On the one hand I get where you’re coming from, those sections are very thematically different from the rest of the game, but realistically it’s just a couple of minutes of very easy stealth.

I'm tired of every game being live service angielski

I’m really frustrated with how almost every new game these days is being forced into this “live service” model. It seems like no matter what type of game you want to play—whether it’s an RPG, shooter, or even something traditionally single-player—you’re stuck with always-online requirements. And for what? It adds...

Nibodhika,

While I get where you’re coming from, Fallout 76 was a bad example, you don’t need a subscription to play (unless your preferred system of choice asks you for it regardless of the game you play) and it is intended to be a multiplayer first game, you might not like it, but it is not an example of what you’re complaining anymore than Elder Scrolls Online or World of Warcraft (which actually has a subscription model).

And the answer is simple, don’t buy those games, there are thousands of excellent single player games, if always online games start to fail companies will stop doing it, vote with your wallet. I recommend taking a look at indie games, there are several excellent games and almost assuredly they don’t have DRM, or at least not always online ones.

Nibodhika,

Steam vs GoG is a turf war, Epic vs anything will make people side with anything. The problem is that Epic has a shitty store with shitty features, and the only way it can compete with the others out there is to pay piles of money to game devs so they make their game exclusive to their store for some time. So usually people just ignore the game until it comes up in another store, and most of us have completely forgotten about it by then so when we find out just add it to the wishlist and wait for a 90% discount in a while. The game has been out for years at that point so a massive discount is expected soon and you already waited years to play, you can wait a bit more and save money, plus that teaches companies that signing exclusivity contracts is a shit deal.

Nibodhika,

One small but important correction. NFTs are not a scam, it’s an amazing technology that has the potential to revolutionize lots of stuff, that became popular when people used it for stupid shit.

Saying NFT is a scam because people have used it to scam others is like saying phones are a scam because people call others over the phone to scam them.

NFTs are essentially a decentralized token. This means that they can be used to represent anything you might want to represent with a token, e.g. ownership of a physical object such as a car or a house; ownership of a digital asset, such as a website or game; some predetermined amount of something, similar to a stock or bonds; etc. The fact that some people used it to mean ownership of random pictures and people thought buying random pictures on the internet for a ridiculous amount of money was a good idea tells you more about people than about the technology.

Nibodhika,

The legal validity of things come from people using it and courts enforcing it, someone years ago might have said:

That’s neat. Until a representation of something on a piece of paper has any legal meaning regarding authenticity, ownership, or anything else, and until the overwhelming majority usage of paper isn’t as a scam, paper remains a pathetic and comically stupid class of speculative asset constituting a pyramid scheme that also happens to destroy the environment.

The thing is that even if a technology is used mostly for stupid things that tells you more about humans than about the technology itself. Or do you also think that phone calls are scams because 90% of the phone calls you receive nowadays are scams, even though the technology behind phone calls is the same used for mobile internet.

Also the destroy the environment claim is really bogus, for starter money pollutes more than crypto when you consider all of the chain of what it takes to produce and transport money. But also for example if you live in the US your home probably pollutes more than a mining farm since they’re usually in places where electricity is extremely cheap, mostly in China near a hydroelectric power plant. But also the technology itself doesn’t need to consume that amount of energy, that’s just the current implementation, but there’s a push to move to PoS instead of PoW, which would mean that NFTs (and crypto in general) would not need farms or even a specially powerful computer.

Nibodhika,

The whole point of cryptocurrency is decentralized ownership. That’s the big breakthrough in technology, it’s the whole point of it, I can try to ELI5 how that works if you want to, but for the moment I’m just going to assume you accept that cryptocurrency can demonstrate ownership.

NFTs are an extension of that, except they can’t be split or traded by one another, i.e. they’re non-fungible. Therefore you can by definition prove ownership of those tokens, as that’s the whole point of the technology, which again, if you’re curious I can try to explain how it works.

How does ownership of those tokens transfers to ownership of something else? Well, that’s an excellent question, and the answer is that it happens in the same way that a piece of paper grants ownership of a house. There’s no innovative technology behind that piece of paper, but still everyone would agree that it grants ownership, and the reason is that the authority that enforces that chose to respect that piece of paper. Nowadays this is mostly databases and the piece of paper is just generated from the records there, but this is very insecure as anyone with database write access (or access to the physical folder containing the documents in case of old paper deeds) can transfer ownership. NFTs solve this because only the owner of a token can transfer it to someone else, so they’re inherently safer than any of the alternatives.

Again, the technology is great and has millions of excellent applications, but people use it for pyramid schemes and scamming others, but people do that with any piece of technology.

Nibodhika,

There are some valid points here, and I agree that the energy could be used elsewhere and that green energy is not entirely green.

I even agree that for most cryptocurrency as they are now the cost per transaction is higher than alternatives. However the technology for cryptocurrency, especially with PoC can be a lot more efficient in scale. To get an idea of it you can look at Visa, which processes 1700 transactions per second, BCH can do 178, so 10% of it, ETH2 is supposed to be able to process at least 20k, so 10x that amount. I imagine either of those coins pollute a comparable amount to visa when you consider everything that visa needs to operate (machines, cards, servers, etc). I feel that people don’t take these sort of stuff into consideration when they talk about the energy consumption of crypto. There is a discussion to be had here, but blankly stating that it’s an environmental disaster is fear mongering.

Nibodhika,

Do you consider a deed to be proof of ownership? A stock? The registry of a car? They’re not inherently proof of ownership, they’re just pieces of paper or entries on a database. If you go down the road of what is proof of ownership then no technology we have is able to prove it.

The thing is that NFTs you can prove ownership of the token, if the token correlates with something, e.g. if the DMV stored car ownership in a Blockchain, NFTs could be used to represent car ownership in a secure and decentralized way.

Nibodhika,

No, there isn’t, but there are advantages to it as well, just like how a database has advantages over a paper folder.

An NFT can’t be transferred by anyone other than the owner, and ownership can be verified independently.

Here’s an example of a use that would be very cool and would take advantage of it (even though I know it’s unlikely to happen). Ownership of games, some games are sold on different platforms, to verify the ownership of the game (or DLC, or cosmetics) games have to verify with first party services (like PSN or Steam), which means that for the most part you need to buy games on each platform individually, but if platforms used an NFT for it games would be buy once play anywhere, and they would allow you to sell or even borrow games, and no company could prevent you from doing so. Which is obviously the reason this will never happen, but it’s a nice idea.

That being said there are downsides to it as well, such as a person being the full owner of stuff means that a person can lose the key and therefore lose access to the house, or that scammer can steal everything, whereas making you sign your house to someone else is a lot more beurocratic, which serves to protect you from you.

Just to be clear, I’m not a “we should use NFT for everything” type of person, in fact I don’t think there are many use cases nowadays that are worth using it, but the technology is interesting regardless, and solves the problem of how to prove ownership without a centralized trusted organization.

Nibodhika,

Crypto energy usage goes up the more it’s being used and the more decentralized it becomes.

That’s wrong, crypto energy consumption has to do with how hard is the PoW difficulty, it does not correlate at all with usage or centralization, it’s only related with security, i.e the more energy it consumes the more energy someone would need to use to attack the technology.

But the energy needed to mine 1 transaction or 1000 is the same. There are problems at scale, but power consumption is not one of them.

Centralized services like Visa can increase the network load while barely increasing the energy requirements.

Not really, they need more servers to process more transactions, but cryptocurrency can scale up much more easily because the whole infrastructure from consumer to miner is decentralized.

Crypto bros always forget that to replace the banking system, crypto would need to replace the infrastructure as well, but because of decentralization it would be less energy efficient for the same result.

That’s what most people fail to see, the infrastructure for a scale at the size of visa is already in place for crypto. So there wouldn’t be an increase in power consumption by mass adoption, only by miner adoption, and that’s a difficult thought to grasp, it’s like if everyone could borrow their computer to visa or Mastercard to process their transactions, the amount of people wanting to offer their computer to visa/master would define how much resources they use, but an increase in visa users doesn’t mean an increase in visa borrowed servers and vice-versa.

You can just stop, there’s no way to greenwash crypto and decentralization. The amount of transactions happening on all crypto networks at the moment could be handled by one server if it was centralized. There’s benefits to it, stop trying to sell it as being green, it’s not and never will be.

I’m not trying to green wash, but crypto is not the environmental disaster the person claimed, especially not when you take into consideration PoS and newer coins with different validation methods.

Nibodhika,

First of all losing value and being a scam are not correlated, the dollar is losing its value compared to the Euro for the past year but it’s not a scam.

Secondly that would be an association fallacy, “X is a scam, X is an NFT, therefore all NFT are scam”.

Nibodhika,

Did you read the link you sent? It clearly states that only the amount of miners matter like I said before, the amount of transactions has nothing to do with it, you’re mixing the two.

The more people mine, the more decentralized it is

Wrong, decentralization is hard to measure, one person with a mining farm is centralized, while hundreds of people with their personal computer are decentralized but both produce the same amount of hash power. So you can have one person investing more and more in mining rigs increasing the total amount of mining power in the pool but decreasing it’s decentralization.

the more energy is necessary because difficulty is increased.

Yes, this is correct, if you have more computers mining you will have a higher energy spending.

The more transactions happen, the more blocks are required,

Wrong, there’s one blonc every 10 minutes, regardless of the amount of transactions that happen. Did you even read the link you sent?

the more energy needs to be spent to confirm all the transactions.

Wrong, the energy needed to confirm 1 or 1000 transactions is the same, and it’s related to the hashing difficulty established by the total amount of hash power, again, did you even read the link you sent?

The more it’s used, the higher the value, the more people mine.

Wrong, the value of an asset does not necessarily correlate with it’s use, for example gold is more valuable than dollar, even though dollar is a lot more used.

There’s a limit to the number of transactions per block as well, so no, your can’t just say “1 or 1000 it’s the same”.

Yes there is, but until that limit is hit the amount of transactions doesn’t matter. Also that limit is artificial and can be easily raised if needed, as it was done on Bitcoin Cash which can do hundreds of transactions per second more than Bitcoin, but because it has less miners uses less energy, thus proving you are wrong and the two are not correlated.

Visa is already able to handle 24000 transactions per second as is, no need for more infrastructure.

And ETH2 is theoretically capable of 100k, and that’s just one coin which BTW is PoS so nothing of what we talked about miners applies to it. No miners means less power consumption by the network as a whole.

Crypto uses 1% of the world’s energy production for a couple trillions in assets, the financial system uses 2.5% for quadrillions in assets, multiple thousands more than crypto, no, crypto can’t scale to that without a huge environmental impact.

Do you have a source for that? But also you’re measuring environmental impact as just energy consumption, and that’s very wrong, by that same standard I could say crypto is green because it produces no plastic, whereas Visa has huge factories to produce plastic for their cards, their card machines, etc. If you only focus on one environmental impact it’s easy to make anyone to be the bad guy, and for some reason people only see the Bitcoin energy usage and completely ignore that the energy consumption there is the whole story, whereas for other things there’s hundreds of factors pilling on top to generate the environmental impact.

Yes you are trying to greenwash crypto, just stop.

Again, I’m not, I recognize that PoW is an energy hungry method of confirmation, however it’s not the environmental catastrophe that the original comment said and if you take into consideration ALL of the environmental impact of alternatives (not just energy consumption) you will see that it’s not as bad as people make it out to be. Which doesn’t mean it’s good, but it’s far from an environmental catastrophe.

Also when you take into consideration that we were originally talking NFTs, and that’s mostly an Ethereum thing, and Ethereum is migrating to PoS, it’s even less of an environmental catastrophe.

Nibodhika,

Cool, I’ve been out of the loop on crypto for years, just checked and you are correct, now the full Ethereum network, capable of beating visa in TpS runs at 0.0026 TWh/yr, i.e. 1/100x of the energy consumption of PayPal, therefore proving my point above.

Nibodhika,

Nope, never bought any of the NFTs that were sold to idiot speculators because I understand the technology and see no value in owning a token representing a digital image. I feel that the rage of downvoting comes from people who got scammed because they didn’t understood the technology and now see it mentioned and think it’s all a scam, similar to how old people used to think emails were a scam because they sent money to a prince in Nigeria.

Nibodhika,

Those are two different things

being a self-contained wad of hardware

Steam Deck checks this, but so do laptops, raspberry pis and smartphones.

unable to be upgraded or repaired piece by piece.

Again Steam Deck is almost as upgradable and repairable as a laptop, and more repairable than a raspberry pi or a smartphone.

So that definition of console doesn’t work, otherwise raspberry pies, laptops, and especially phones would also be consoles. The differentiating factor is locking of the system with the hardware, in that sense Apple is more “console-like” than non-Apple competitors. Also The primary function of a gaming console must be gaming.

With those two extra points the Steam Deck hits one but misses the other. It is primarily for gaming, but the system is not locked down, you can change it how you want and even remove it entirely and put a different one.

So with any definition you can find the Steam Deck is not quite a console, but it does provide a console experience, so it’s in a weird space.

Nibodhika,

I disagree. Your phone can happily do that today as long as you’re willing to play old games. This will always be the case, even when phones are able to play things today are now considered AAA, Desktop computers will be leaps ahead in what they can do.

Nibodhika,

Yeah, but now you can buy an all-in-one convenient PC to plug on your TV with almost 100% retro compatibility, it’s called the Steam Deck and it’s awesome.

Nibodhika,

But it is a replacement for a console like I told the person I replied to.

Nibodhika,

Yup, you can buy the official dock or really any usb-C dock. Resolution can be set, so you can even do 4k on it if the tv supports it and the deck can handle it for that game

Nibodhika,

Downvoting per the rules, as I spent months obsessed with this game, having notes with the codes open on my second screen. Excellent game.

Nibodhika,

Also pissed that the Linux version never made it to Steam, now that Proton is a thing I forgot to check it again.

Nibodhika,

Out of Space a cozy co-op game similar to Overcooked but less chaotic.

Nibodhika,

Never heard of it, and sounds awesome, regexes are the sort of things that need lots of practice to be good at, a game seems like a great way to keep the skill alive

Nibodhika,

I don’t think it was my GotY, but still an excellent game

Nibodhika,

Nope, you are wrong, this is a common mistake that Epic keeps spreading as missinformation. Valve does NOT enforce price parity on other platforms, there are games that are sold cheaper on other stores, this is up to the publisher to decide, but most publishers find it easier to have the same price across the board. If this was true games that are exclusive on Epic would be cheaper until they come to Steam years later, but they aren’t.

The mistake happens because there is one specific case in which Valve enforces price parity, but for this you need to know three things:

  • Valve gives away for free infinite steam keys to publishers
  • Those keys can be sold by the publisher elsewhere
  • If they do that the publisher keeps 100% of the revenue of that sale

That sale of that free steam key for which Valve is not charging anything is regulated and can’t be sold cheaper than Steam on regular basis, it can be in a sale for cheaper, but the regular price must match Steam and if it goes on sale outside of Steam eventually it needs to do a similar sale on Steam (but not necessarily at the same time).

So one thing that’s amazing that Valve does for people who publish their games with them is getting them hate because of Epic, please stop spreading missinformation.

Nibodhika,

In that link you have one person making a claim without any backing or evidence. Even if that did happen there are multiple possible explanations:

  • The email was not clear about the other stores not selling keys
  • The person who answered the email did not understand that they weren’t talking about steam keys
  • The person answering the email doesn’t know what they’re talking about
  • Etc

And in that same link you have multiple persons in the comments describing the exact opposite experience providing the same amount of evidence, so if the text on that link is evidence that Valve does that, then the comments there are even more evidence that they don’t.

If only there was a way of knowing… Well, they did say they opened a lawsuit, and those are public record so the email would be there since it’s crucial to the case, without it they would have no case, right? Feel free to read the entire complaint here and you’ll notice the email is suspiciously missing, their claims are that Valve wouldn’t give them more keys to resell, which is directly opposite to what the blog claims.

I can do you one better, Overgrowth is a sequel to Lugaru, which is paid on Steam but free if you install via your package manager on Linux, therefore completely disproving the fact that Steam enforces price parity even for games from this company

Nibodhika,
  • You provide a link to someone saying “Valve said they would do X” without evidence, I point out that in that same link you have multiple people saying “Valve told me they would not do X” with the same amount of evidence.
  • I additionally show you the lawsuit the blog talks about where at no point the supposed email is shown
  • Additionally I show you another game from the same company that has lower price outside of Steam

I don’t know how much more evidence do you need.

Nibodhika,

Yeah, it does, but the only claim for which they present any evidence is the keys thing, showing a couple of screenshots.

I haven’t read it all, but it seems that here is a ruling for most of the stuff.

Nibodhika,

I’m also not American (well, technically I’m, but you meant from the USA not from the American continent) but yeah, I think it’s still ongoing, although I remember hearing a while back that Valve settled some case, not sure if this one (notice that settling doesn’t mean admitting guilt or that they were going to lose, but sometimes it’s just cheaper to settle than to keep defending yourself (the problem is that on the long run this sends a message that you’re a good target).

Also I believe they would have won the claim that they don’t enforce price parity just by pointing at the other game from Wolfire (Lugaru) which is paid on Steam and free outside of it, and Valve never did anything about it.

Nibodhika,

You’re wrong, some of those doors were always there, the giant was there from the start, the big door he smashes was there since before the DLC released. You just didn’t knew that was a DLC because it hadn’t come out yet.

Dead cells is still a complete game, the DLCs just give you more of the same thing, you can still get hundreds of hours from the base game alone. By your standards no DLC could ever be made.

Can anyone suggest some good co-op games for two people? angielski

Hello all! My buddy and I finally finished up Baldur’s Gate 3 this week and we are not left with a giant co-op game shaped whole in our hearts. It was such an incredible experience and it was truly even more fun running through it together. We are excited to hop into another game, but we have no idea what to play. We’ve...

Nibodhika,

Since you played all Borderlands and just finished a D&D game, why not play “B&B” on Borderlands, there’s a game called Tiny Tina’s Wonderland which plays like Borderlands but is set in “medieval” fantasy (but still has gun for some reason)

Nibodhika,

Someone told me the same thing, I started playing it but forgot about it, would need to restart it.

Nibodhika,

Open world RPGs were always the goal, old games tried to mask the hardware limitations by using several techniques. By the time the Witcher 3 came along open world RPGs were the most common thing, in fact at the time lots of people called the Witcher a sellout because of that, it’s like if it had come up a couple years ago and had base buildiechanics, EVERYONE else was doing it.

There are LOTS of examples that pre-date TW3, I’ll limit myself to a few, just because it’s the ones I played. In the 90s and early 2000s I used to play Ultima Online, which is an MMO from 97 that has a vast open world. But if you want first person, Oblivion is old enough to drink.

Nibodhika,

Based on games that I’ve 100% myself.

  • The Stanley Parable
  • Graveyard keeper
  • Out of space (This is a couch co-op, me and my SO 100% this game and still play it regularly with one mod installed to enable huge ship sizes)
Nibodhika,

But they didn’t. Let’s look at the facts:

  1. There are alternative stores on Android since forever.
  2. From 1, Opening a secondary store on Android was always an option.
  3. 30% they claim is abusive is the industry standard, i.e. no one is taking advantage of their monopoly to enforce that, because even in markets without a monopoly that’s the amount charged.
  4. Epic lost their lawsuit against Apple, which was the only company he was suing that actually enforced a monopoly in their platform.
  5. Secondary stores are allowed on Apple in the EU as a result of DMA which has nothing to do with Epic.
  6. From 5, Opening a secondary store on Apple is now an option regardless of what Epic did.

So you have one company that sued two others to be able to launch their store there, one of the companies wasn’t preventing them from doing so, and they lost their lawsuit against the other one. Completely unrelated to that, the EU forced that second company to allow third-party stores. Conclusion, Epic’s lawsuit has nothing to do with this announcement.

Nibodhika,

The state of California also determined that 30% tax was okay for Apple to charge, so they’re not very objective with their determinations.

Nibodhika,

The iOS version also has nothing to do with their lawsuit of Apple, they lost that one. It’s due to an unrelated law in the EU, which is why this is only available in the EU.

Nibodhika,

The EU has had digital legislations since long before that lawsuit. Or do you think Epic is also responsible for GDPR?.

So you think that the European commission saw a lawsuit in a different country and decided “We need that” then rushed to write the entirety of DMA in less than 4 months. If you think DMA and Epic lawsuits are related the most possible order of events is that Epic saw what was going to be passed in the EU and decided to suit Apple and Google to get the same in the USA

Nibodhika,

I’ve already addressed this in other replies below. This goes beyond the existence of app store and into the abusive nature of them. Here’s some light reading for you.

Irrelevant, the news from OP is that secondary stores are now allowed on Android and iOS. Not defending Google or anything, but whatever abuse they did is irrelevant to this point. The fact remains, other stores exist on Android.

You’re just repeating yourself. Number go up, I guess?

No, 2 is a conclusion from 1. You didn’t even got through 1 properly trying to bring whatever bad things Google might do with their power, fact 1 is there are other stores on Android, fact 2, which is a conclusion derived from fact 1 is that Epic could have released their own store there regardless of the lawsuit. This takes Android off the picture from the remaining of the discussion.

Your parents should have taught you when you were 5 that just because other people are doing it doesn’t make it okay.

That’s not the point, if someone claims that a company is using their monopoly power to force a high tax on developers, but the tax is the same on every other store regardless of being monopoly or not then their argument is bullshit. Why do you think developers pay 30% to Steam? If they thought Steam didn’t provided value they would just not release there. But they do, therefore 30% is not abusive, it’s what developers are willing to pay for the service.

Well the EU picked up where the US failed. That’s why they have an app store. But Epic continues the fight regardless. As mentioned elsewhere, they won their lawsuit against Google with the state of California stating Google’s app store is indeed a monopoly. Epic is responsible for both.

No they didn’t, DMA is an extension of GDPR and P2B Regulations, it has nothing to do with Epic.

Highly doubt that that is a coincidence. It has everything to do with Epic.

Like I told you in your other reply, laws as complex as DMA don’t get written in a short amount of time, it’s impossible for these to be related.

You’re repeating yourself again.

Again, I’m drawing a conclusion from a point before. From 1 you have 2 which means the lawsuit has nothing to do with Android, and from 5 you have 6 which means their lawsuit had nothing to do with iOS either, since those are the two platforms being discussed we have the overall conclusion that the lawsuits and this announcement are unrelated.

You haven’t disproven any of the propositions, nor found any logical error with the conclusion from those propositions (in fact both times you thought the conclusion was just a repetition of the proposition before). Just claiming I’m wrong is not gonna cut it, unless you have any facts that counter anything I said my conclusion stands.

Nibodhika,

Never claimed they were, I pointed out that DMA is not in a void, EU has multiple laws in that direction, DMA is an extension of GDPR.

Nibodhika,

Somehow related is pretty far away from claiming they are the same thing.

First of all they’re both consumer protection laws related to IT, which was my point that EU already has a track of enforcing these kinds of law, and it has nothing to do with one irrelevant lawsuit in the US.

But also GDPR is a law to protect customers data, after it was enforced and people saw the big companies were not untouchable other laws started to be discussed to further regulate them. Parallel to this the DSM was being enforced, part of which has the P2B Regulations, which regulates unfair contracts and trading practices. After both of these came into effect a new law, which is essentially the child of these two, started being discussed which would regulate how large companies corner the market and other abusive practices. To think that this law has nothing to do with GDPR but instead is because of a random lawsuit some random company lost in some random country is ridiculous.

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • rowery
  • Technologia
  • Pozytywnie
  • nauka
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • fediversum
  • motoryzacja
  • niusy
  • sport
  • slask
  • muzyka
  • informasi
  • Gaming
  • esport
  • Blogi
  • Psychologia
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • lieratura
  • tech
  • giereczkowo
  • test1
  • ERP
  • krakow
  • antywykop
  • Cyfryzacja
  • zebynieucieklo
  • kino
  • warnersteve
  • Wszystkie magazyny