LilyVess

It's useful. It's useful enough that justify the economy, climate, actual living places, etc 's cost?

I don't think so honestly.

I'm somewhat relieved that in not the only one feeling like this. At the same time, I'm sorry you're feeling like this too :(

No "I made", no "please star", directly "100% AI generated FOR me". I like your style and the app looks pretty useful tbh.

I can't believe that we have "IA" but setting up a printer is still harder than self-hosting something in docker.

Have you heard about GoG? Just to be clear, not being able to access a game in any way after the publisher decides it's not worth it is indeed the core of all of these.

No one is arguing they have to keep their servers and games running forever. It has never been a part of the conversation.

There's much more than "you support it forever or don't support it at all". GoG allows you to download the game installer and do with it whatever you want. Buying a physical copy means you can play the 1.0.0 Cyberpunk in you PS3 even after the store closes. Even if your PS3 completely breaks, you can emulate it because you have access to the game no matter what happens in the future.

Reducing games access to one singular source that no one can have access is what is happening. There will be not offline installer, no game to emulate or preserve, no mods, no local play, nothing, and literally, the only thing they have to do is nothing.

What the hell are you talking about. John Nintendo himself didn't had to pay anyone to make Mupen64. I assure you that Michael Sony didn't had to pay to his engineer so Bloodborne could be played outside a PS4.

No one. Absolutely no one is asking that Sony or any other company release patches forever and that I could play Crash Bash in a PS5 or boicot. My PS4 broke years ago, I dumped my Bloodborne copy and play it again on my PC. Sony didn't had to pay anyone a single cent for that to happen.

I'm really curious of who are you listening that made you think that the issue with killing physical media is "I want support forever"...

What do you mean with "engineers works for free in perpetuity"?

So... We should go backwards instead of forward?

For thousands of years back you could trade people for cows, owning your life is a massive historical misunderstanding.

You could own the Mona Lisa. You could own the original Dante's inferno. For thousands of years there wasn't the technology to have a copy of the Iliad, then there was and you could have a copy that wasn't man-made, the press was born. You couldn't have a copy of a painting without a massive spending on a replica, then in 1600 in Japan with wooden blocks they mass distributed art of Hokusai. You couldn't own music until you could. You couldn't own performances until you could.

Those were never moral or logical reasons not to, the technology just didn't exists. Now the technology does exist and you say that because it didn't before, then it's a fluke?

For most of human history people died at early ages, we should go back to that and ditch all antibiotics I guess then, if "history" is the bar you're measuring "moral".

Also, guess what, the architect of the work was never in control of their art nor had the "moral authority" of how their work is consumed. Do you really thing that Homer personally went and trained everyone who wanted to interpret the Iliad? Your whole argument is based in something that didn't even existed in the first place with tons of examples of the contrary that the only thing I can think is that you're trolling or severely brainwashed.

They sold a product, not an "experience". Without massive access and preservation of art in all forms civilization couldn't even begin to grow as fast as it did in the last thousand years.

And before anything else, the mere concept of "owning" is the single most important part of capitalism, if they want to play the "owning" game then we should all be able to play the game. Also historically "owning" didn't exist. We should course correct to the one true way of tribadism and nomads. I guess.

Funny. The consumer didn't make physical media worse for the last 15 years.

Manual or at least something besides the disk: Gone Price: Same as digital despite they getting more profit from digital. Disc: half the game, other half downloads. (Not always, mind you) Game: Half baked without at least two patches.

They've been giving less and less with physical editions to push the more profitable digital store, and then they act shocked when no one buys physical.

Shockingly, if the only difference between physical and digital is that you need to go out of your way to pick the physical, most people will just get the digital.

Still I got my Switch games in physical so I can trade with friends.

Wait. Can someone explain to me what just happened? I just googled those two meds and both are anti-parasites... What is happening here? Why are that expensive and why did they took them??

If it was so cut and dry it wouldn't be a "dilemma" don't you think?

"IA is very good"

• IA Corporation

I don't know chief. I get your point, but quoting the people who benefits the most out of it seems like a conflict of interest.

DuPont said Sprays weren't that bad for the planet, backed it up with a DuPont financed "research" and used DuPont financed media.

So, here is another quote:

Dario Amodei — quote on opacity: "People outside the field are often surprised and alarmed to learn that we do not understand how our own AI creations work. They are right to be concerned: this lack of understanding is essentially unprecedented in the history of technology."

I think is very different paying for building a society more complex than what we can understand and 10 million deaths by lead poisoning because some rich family preferred even more money over the life of everyone else. But you do you. The way you think "we will pay wether we like or not so we better make it count and take the biggest debt we can" is what have the world rotten as a whole.

"IA" have very few applications besides faking things. It fakes someone having read that mail, it fakes having wrote that mail, it fakes art, it fakes "helping you", it instead do fake job for you.

It's the "IA" spite can look too spiteful, but there's a key difference I think between "IA" and actually useful technologies: A computer helps you do things, not only work, better and faster, "IA" do it for you. You don't "learn" to use an "IA", you do have to learn to use internet and a computer.

"IA" is less akin to something like a computer and more like NFT, Radium Watches, etc. "Innovation" for the sake of selling instead of progress. Has is uses? Of course, but it create far more problems that it tries or even cares to solve and it's inclusion on everything just for the sake of selling just screams like plastic, radium, Teflon, lead on gasoline, etc. The promised miraculous new invention. Sooner or later we are going to pay for it. Again. All of us.