Such negative posts about this.

If you don’t want it, don’t buy it. It’s not pay to play. You can play the game just fine without spending a dime.

Oh and by the way, the reason you can play without spending a dime is because they monetize on people who are willing to spend money on it.

Again, if you want to spend money you can. If you don’t want to spend money, don’t.

Hal saying “I have aimbot I can’t shoot. I can’t shoot” because he’d basically mow down everyone, then when his teammates got knocked, he was like…okay nvm lemme one clip you guys.

Hilariously, there is a chance aimbot wasn’t on when he one clipped the caustic (and that it was just straight aim assist on controller).

Can you imagine if the hacker was more clever and didn’t make his cheats obvious for genburten?

Everyone was on the lookout for it the next game. But what if he just subtly did it to hal (one of the best if not the best players in the game) . It would be an even bigger fucking deal.

Accusations of cheating or aimboting already happen with pros because they are so good. Imagine having some clips of hal legit aimboting (unbeknownst to him) in a finals lobby.

Is that Apples argument though? I read the article but now its locked behind a paywall so I can’t re-read.

But your lay terms example isn’t exactly what happened according to the article. What Google did would be akin to buying a PC with Ubuntu on it, but where Google has made deals with Canonical to make their app store default. You can still use Canonical’s Ubuntu snAPP store, or flatpaks, dpkg -i, etc. But the simple fact that Google paid money to Canonical to make their Google app store the default is what the court is saying is anti-competitive.

The thing is: I dont necessarily disagree with that assessment. I think the court may have gotten this correct. Large companies have been using tactics like this for decades at this point to cement their position/fend off competition. It’s the definition of anti-competitive.

My point is that Apple, by completely refusing to allow “side loading”/other app stores on their devices has somehow sidestepped “anti-competitive” regulation here. It’s almost like it wasn’t ‘overt’ enough? Maybe because money didn’t change hands. Again, I am not a lawyer, but its hard to argue that not allowing other services or apps onto your system is good for competition. Maybe thats the rub? Maybe not being good for competition and being anti-competitive are legally different things? Maybe its because Google to an “overt action” and used their position, money, and influence to make deals to stifle competition, but Apple has it’s “safety and security” , “people pay for our walled garden”, “our walled ecosystem is the product” arguments.

edit: by the way this seems like it would set a legal precedence that Google will get beat up for again which might screw over A LOT of us. If what Google did here is bad, then Google paying Firefox, Apple, or whoever money to make their web search the default, seems like it’d fall into similar legal territory.

I know Firefox basically only survives because of Google’s payments for search supremacy.

This is so wild. Google allows side loading and 3rd party app stores…and that is the reason they were found guilty.

Unlike Apple, Google allows people to download apps onto phones running its Android operating system without going through its official app store, but the company strikes deals with phone manufacturers to favor Google’s official app store.

So because they strike deals to favor their store, even though they allow 3rd party stores to begin with, they’ve violated the SAA.

Meanwhile, Apple who refuses to allow competition or 3rd party app stores is sitting pretty because…well, they haven’t “favored” their own store over rival stores. BECAUSE RIVAL STORES CANT EXIST. I don’t know how you could favor your store any harder than that??

The legal shenanigans around all of this are frustrating to watch as a lay person.

This is dumb.

You have to think of new MacBooks like new cars. Each year BMW makes a new M3. It’s always a little better than last year. But who is buying a new M3 every year? Not most people. They are upgrading from their 10 year old M3 that’s finally kicked the bucket. And you know what? The newest m3 is a massive upgrade from that.

Now, pretend this midrange m3 chip is replacing someone’s old Intel MacBook pro from 6-7 years ago. It’s a huge fucking upgrade.

These dumb hot take articles are tiring.

I think the pricing model was a direct consequence of being in bad shape financially.

But obviously when you shoot yourself in the foot when you are already bleeding, it certainly doesn’t help.

Sometimes, you litteraly have ti spend hours learning stuff before you can actually start playing and enjoy. Or you need to spend half of the games managing inventory.

I realized that this is why I’ve always gravitated to FPS games. The controls are all the same and getting into the game is much faster.

I had a single crash playing starfield on PopOS. Other than that, it’s been incredibly performant for me. Ryzen 5700x and 6700xt GPU

Jesus Christ. 15% of your 1TB for a single game.

Did you watch the response video? It explains that. Colton responded…but had forgotten to add the billet dudes email to it. So it was a bone head mistake that is compounded by bad processes and bad decisions.

It’s not as nefarious as people are making it seem.

The knee jerking around this is insane.

*if you keep it updated and follow best practices

Self-hosting isn’t a requirement for this and you probably shouldn’t if you havent self hosted things before.

They’ve been independently audited and have earned enough trust to use their hosting imo.

I think it’s just Jerboa right now. You could set them up as progressive web apps I think, but I haven’t really looked into it.

It’s funny you say that about iOS because the big update before last(or whenever they went to material design or whatever) made my Android feel like a Fischer Price OS.