Should be feasible, many of my bills allow it. If there’s an issue w/ lag, they could always allow it only for wallet top-ups and people could use that.
But I think the issue is that if they accept these payment processors at all, they need to comply w/ their policies. Completely cutting them off could significantly hurt sales.
I thought it was great. Yeah, it doesn’t break any new ground, but it’s a solid Harry Potter-universe adventure game. It gets bonus points for being developed by a studio near where I live. My kids love HP and we enjoyed playing through it together, in fact, one of my kids made their own account and beat it before me.
The main opposition I see to it is being affiliated w/ JK Rowling, nothing bad about the game itself, other than features they wish it had.
credit - visa, MasterCard, discover, American Express (all ubiquitous)
debit - mostly mastercard, some are visa
Prepaid cards - mostly MasterCard and Visa, amex has one too
mobile Payments (Samsung, Apple, Google) - you pay using credit or debit; I’ll include PayPal here too
cash - doesn’t work online obviously, and some places don’t accept it or at least discourage it (e.g. many self checkouts, food trucks, smaller restaurants)
checks - like cash, but many stores don’t accept them at all
Some online places accept bank transfers, but that’s mostly for paying regular bills, not anonymous checkout.
There are some fringe ones like money orders (basically cash), cryptocurrencies (very rarely accepted), and Venmo (mostly just food trucks, fairs, and small restaurants).
Amex and Discover are ubiquitous too, at least in the US. I honestly don’t remember the last time I went somewhere that they weren’t accepted, but there was a couple weeks when Visa wasn’t accepted at a grocery store because I guess they were renegotiating their deal or something (local Kroger chain).
My Discover card has foreign transaction fees, so I don’t check when I leave the country, and I mostly use my Visa since it does waive those fees.
I’m guessing there’s legal pressure from some countries, and to stay in their good graces (i.e. ward off alternatives), they’re making these policies global.
Taler isn’t a general payment solution, it’s designed so that separate entities can have their own way to handle small transactions. For example, you attend a conference and deposit some cash into the event, and then you go and use those tokens to exhange for various stuff at the event, and the event organizers settle up with merchants after the event.
Rolling this out on a more global scale mea a you’d need some major institution, like a bank, to back the currency and handle settling up. AFAIK, this hasn’t happened anywhere and isn’t likely to happen because banks already have a system that works that requires far less effort: credit and debit cards.
We already have a solution here that has some market presence, and it’s cryptocurrency. Get some Monero and you can go buy stuff today without those transactions being public. The fees are minimal, transactions are fast, and merchants exist. The main issue is the negative public perception of cryptocurrencies, which is mostly due to speculation and bad actors running scams, but there are solid, proven currencies that can be useful as a cash alternative.
All those games you listed are violence centric, so I imagine the non-violent route isn’t as satisfying. I tried to finish Dishonored (not really an RPG) without violence, but most of abilities involve violence and getting caught just meant waiting for them to kill me instead of fighting back. The gameplay just isn’t optimized for it like something like Thief is.
There are games designed for non-violence where violence simply isn’t an option, such as Disco Elysium or WanderHome. Searching specifically for games without violence is probably a better option than finding games where nonviolence is an option, unless you’re specifically looking to find clever ways to play games non-traditionally.
Most games require killing the end boss to finish the game, how exactly would you play around that? Or do you mean don’t kill anyone who doesn’t try to kill you?
ve been to some, never spoken though… also, not DEFCON though.
Yeah, I’ve spoken at local JS and Go confs with several hundred to a couple thousand attendees (my sessions were small, like 30 people), and attended a couple others.
DEFCON is much larger, but looking at the schedule, it seems pretty similar, a mix of relatively entry level stuff and more advanced topics. So someone attending doesn’t say much other than that they’re interested in cyber security.
Its like getting a 2 year nursing assistant degrer and then acting as if you can safely perform a brain surgery.
Interesting. I haven’t watched enough of his stuff to know what claims he’s made.
various developers have been digging into his code
This just feels like bandwagoning. I’m a dev with tons of years of experience and I’m sure I could get some views of I jump on the train and pull up some sloppy code. But sloppy code doesn’t make something unreleasable, in fact, the browser or app you’re using to read this is guaranteed to have a ton of sloppy code.
I think the main explanation is that he’s not working on it actively. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s not the one writing the code. Maybe he is, idk.
I’m merely pointing to the huge influx of reviews since the drama started on a game that claims to have been launched 7 years ago on Steam. My understanding is that the game has been stalled for years, so why would it get so many reviews now if it’s not review bombing?
I’m guessing that’s where the “review bombing” claim is coming from, not from games published by the publisher he was working with.
He said they had been review bombed, in the affirmative
He has a history of exaggerating and not doing proper research. I’m looking to understand why he said what he did, and my explanation makes sense to me. He probably saw a bunch on his game and a few on the publisher’s other games and jumped to conclusions, which is exactly what happened with SKG.
it’s getting really weird
Then I’ll clarify my motivations here. I hate the internet culture of jumping down someone’s throat the moment they make an unpopular statement. They go through their history and dig up random dirt, much of which is exaggerated or even blatant lies, just to smear them to ruin their reputation.
I absolutely hate that, and it contributes to the misinformation problems we have today. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard and embrace the concept of “innocent until proven guilty.”
So in cases like this where there are a lot of emotions, it’s especially important to look for innocent explanations before assuming guilt. YouTubers and streamers will absolutely jump on the bandwagon to get views, assuming one of the extremes because that gets views. We, as viewers, have the obligation to take a step back and look for motivations to suss out what is true from what’s likely sensationalized.
I’m providing an alternate perspective to hopefully encourage others to take that step back and consider that there may be more to the story. It costs me nothing other than some time (which I’m usually spending on the toilet, let’s be honest), and hopefully it helps preserve a little of what I love about the internet: open discourse where facts rule the day. That seems to be dying, so I do what I can to preserve it.
admittedly based on ignorance
Well yeah, I’m not going to claim something is true unless I can back it up, and when I can, I usually link that evidence. I want others to follow suit and actually back up their claims instead of regurgitating what someone else said just because it aligns with their opinions. Facts should rule the day, not feels, and that’s what I’m challenging here.
I don’t have a strong opinion WRT Pirate Software. I don’t watch his content, I don’t buy his games, and I don’t care what orgs he is involved with. I do care a lot about misinformation and brigading, and that seems to be happening in this case.
If you provide sources, I’m happy to review them so better informed. I’ve done that with other commenters, and I think that process has been helpful for everyone.
It’s also probably the most common type of breach. It’s way easier to compromise tech support than find a vulnerability, so it makes a ton of sense for a company like Blizzard to have an auditing team to test the various attack vectors.
A lot of roles like QA and cyber security sound glamorous, but that’s because people like glamorous titles. If you’ve spent even a tiny amount of time working in a relevant industry (in this case, anything touching computers), you should be able to read between the lines. That “sanitation engineer” is probably just a janitor or garbage truck driver, not the person in charge of the city water filtration services or something.
scavenger hunt badge
I haven’t been, but yeah, that sounds likely. Things like that are to get people new to the industry excited, not to actually challenge hardcore hackers.
I’ve attended and even spoken at some tech conferences, and they’re like 90% entry level stuff with a handful of interesting events and talks that actually break some new ground. I’m in senior level position now, and conferences are something I’d send my juniors to for networking and to get an idea of how they want to grow their career, but I don’t really attend anymore. I imagine cyber security conferences are similar.
Ask him what SYN, SYN-ACK and ACK are
Lol, that’s basic TCP stack stuff, I doubt he would’ve gone that low level at a company like Blizzard. You get to that level when you’re looking for amplification attacks at a place like Cloudflare or the military.
At Blizzard, they most likely want to make sure they’re up to date on security patches, their tech support is following the proper scripts, and IT isn’t getting lazy reviewing reports and whatnot. Basically, liability coverage in case there’s a real breach so their insurance can cover any losses.
But yeah, streamers like to appear like they know their stuff because that’s what gets people to watch.
he obligations have to be considered during development.
They should be, but my understanding is that there’s only a penalty if they kill a game without an EOL solution, and what their EOL plans are don’t need to be complete or even stay the same during development. The wording is really flexible here and allows companies a lot of room to explore different options.
If a company can’t redistribute the server code, their options include (and there are probably more):
write and release a functional replacement
document the API spec for a functional replacement and help the community develop it as the EOL approaches
cut out the server bits, or have them gracefully fall back (e.g. for something like Dark Souls, drop the MP feature)
find a replacement that allows redistribution and make the necessary changes before EOL
That’s certainly easier to do at the start, but my understanding is that the obligation only kicks in once the servers are shut down.
And yes, it’s not “free”, but it’s basically free for an indie shop that likely built the server from scratch or used something FOSS. And that describes PS.
So TL; DW for anyone that made it down this far: PS’s mod made a Twitch alt presumably for the purpose of buying bits to keep a hype train going. Whether this is legal or consistent with the Twitch TOS is debatable.