conciselyverbose

There are a bunch of free channels on the internet that some TVs can just stream without a dedicated app. These channels are supported by ads like cable/whatever channels, but not locked behind a subscription. VLC is supporting whatever formats they use to allow (or make it easier; IDK) people to watch them if they want.

The other part is that they’re working on web assembly to allow sites to use VLC as their embedded video player.

If you don’t immediately throw someone who doesn’t flush off of your property to never return, you’re nasty too.

It’s really not.

In poor countries sure, but not the US or Europe. You will get sued and you will pay if you do that at any scale.

The other benefit with Costco is that they have an extremely generous return policy.

Some obvious stuff has different rules (electronics is 90 days, stuff like tires that have clear expected lifespans have their own rules), but it is extremely liberal. And my experience is that I pretty rarely have to use it, because while not everything is a premium product for a bargain price, they tend to ensure that the suppliers for products they sell have reasonable build quality and make stuff that isn’t trash designed to fail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment,_Inc._v._Connectix_Corp.

The courts aren’t. Nintendo is.

Emulation has already been litigated to hell and back. It’s very clearly legal, including relying on users pulling a blob or two from their hardware for the whole thing to function.

By existing. (Yes, that’s the only argument they made. There is no assertion that anyone associated with Yuzu “cracked” (not necessary) or actively distributed TOTK.)

It’s a distraction. It’s literally impossible for it to be relevant unless the yuzu project page hosted TOTK files.

No, it’s not.

The case Sony lost also relied on the end user having a blob of Sony’s code. A user using their own key and a blob of Nintendo’s firmware, which is the official stance of Yuzu on the correct way to do so, is exactly the same thing. There’s nothing new to be litigated. Every part of Yuzu is very clearly legal.

The fact that it was used to play a game before official release straight up cannot possibly be relevant. It’s a distraction. The project isn’t, and isn’t capable of being, responsible for anything but its own code.

Emulation has also been litigated to hell and is also very clearly legal.

I’ve had decent experience with nobara with a 2080. I had a couple hiccups early, and had to reinstall basically right away, but after that it’s been solid.

But still declared them liable for the actions of their users.

Bad ruling, just less bad than it could be.

If I put the over/under at 10x male pirate to female, are you taking the under?

You should hate it as a manager. You’re filtering out every single quality candidate because only a deranged nut job would even consider such an unhinged request. Submitting a video, in and of itself, proves they are not worth hiring.

You don’t need to process every candidate. Just randomly take 5%, or 1%, or .001%, and do a real hiring process. Anything at all is better than requiring a video application.

There’s also that.

But purely on the premise of “you should take the time to record a video merely for the pleasure of maybe having us look at your application”, their expectations are way out of whack.

This isn’t like when Google put scavenger hunts or puzzles or whatever in ads and gave job offers to people who solved them. The people who got hired by those ads were following through out of curiosity/the fun of solving the problems, and that wasn’t the main/only way to get a job. It’s just a new absurd demand trying to push the threshold of what’s a legitimate ask.

The scary part is presenting it as a fucking privacy feature with no consequences.

Your company requiring video submissions for a fucking application is the easiest “this company is batshit insane and there’s no possibility working for them could ever be worth it” red flag I’ve ever seen.

Basically, just official servers will require anticheat, so worst case you can run your own.

Not the point of the article, but this is nice and reasonable:

This emerging “Palworld has lost X% of its player base” discourse is lazy, but it’s probably also a good time to step in and reassure those of you capable of reading past a headline that it is fine to take breaks from games. You don’t need to feel bad about that. Palworld, like many games before it, isn’t in a position to pump out massive amounts of new content on a weekly basis. New content will come, and it’s going to be awesome, but these things take a little bit of time. There are so many amazing games out there to play; you don’t need to feel guilty about hopping from game to game.

That’s not abuse.

If the developers choose to support that hardware, they have a reason. In either case, there is no way to use open source software that’s abusive, with the exception of stuff like Amazon taking an open source project, modifying it without distribution so they’re not obligated to share their changes, and selling the product as a service (at a scale that makes it extremely difficult for the authors to compete). That’s against the spirit of open source even if it wasn’t foreseen when licenses were written and is hard to legislate.

Using open source software to save money isn’t.

I’m really not surprised. They wouldn’t even want to limit commercial use, because I’d assume companies paying celebrities for little blurbs for company parties and stuff like that is a meaningful chunk of their business.

Hard to take a lawyer seriously when the language is so clear and the direct premise of the site, though. It’s not some obscure power grab in the EULA of a site focused on something different. It’s what you’re getting paid for.

(Humans behavious still mostly eludes me though, totally illogical 🤨)

We’re not rational, but there are patterns. If you’re willing to do some reading Thinking: Fast and Slow is beefy, but helps to show some of the patterns of irrationality in a structured way, from one of the leading experts on human behavior. If that’s too much, Thinking in Bets is a nice taster that still is well backed by much of the same research, but is shorter and more accessible.