iglou

Do you think only big studios make games that need an internet connection? Or why is this comment relevant?

This shows me you don't work anywhere near software. It is not as easy as you think it is.

I find it weird that you're making what seems to me to be a strawman argument about "burdening (mostly) small developers," as I'd say they are mostly not the ones trying to do this bullshit where they try to retroactively destroy art and culture because it stops being profitable enough. Indie studios typically don't design their games to use publisher-operated servers with ongoing costs attached in the first place, let alone to self-destruct when they shut off!

Releasing source code isn't without extra work. My point is, unless you make sure to specifically target the companies abusing gamers, you're going to mainly hurt the part of the industry that is not the problem.

This would be the only type creative work that would be burdened like this.

I find it paradoxical that we're trying to save the gaming industry by burdening (mostly) small developers. Larger studio will no longer be able to abuse the system, but complying will be easy for them.

For indies and small to medium studios though? They struggle enough as it is. Adding the burden of compliance on top is not a great idea.

If we could legally categorize studios in a meaningful way, and therefore target the big ones and leave indies alone, I would support such an idea.

They are exploited constantly. And fixed constantly.

No. It's a valid tactic but needs to be part of a much broader strategy.

Absolute security is unachievable, but it is much harder to probe a black box to understand how it works than reading its entire manual.

Exactly this. On top of being liberticide and hypocritical (alcohol is just as dangerous, if not more dangerous of a drug), it's extremely hard to enforce.

Ban smoking anywhere that is not your home, problem solved

I am of the same opinion, but when it comes to laptops, I'd rather go for an american company that cares about repairability, sustainability, and genuinely good laptops than a EU company without those values. It's not all black and white, and this is a clear case where paying a US company is one of the better choices.

I will trust people using their IT experience as a reason to avoid something, though

There isn't much more they can surveil with a digital euro that they can't yet with how banking works today. Everything is controlled.

So, between a controlled banking system and a controlled bankless/facilitatorless digital euro, I'll pick the one that doesn't give away my money to the financial world.

Fully offline is of course impossible. But it can be partially offline. Blockchain, for instance, doesn't require an internet connection to prove that a transaction is possible, but it does need an internet connection to submit and settle. So you would not need an internet connection to pay, the merchant does to accept payment. Similarly to how this works today with card payments.