I think the issue you’re having is that you’re treating them as categories and subcategories, like most things it’s never that clean. It makes much more sense if you treat them as unordered tags. Arcade isn’t a subcategory of tennis.

Say for instance you had a multiplayer racing simulator game, you could categorise that as multiplayer > racing > sim, but if you have a similar singleplayer game you have single player > racing > sim so clearly those aren’t just subcategories of single/multiplayer.
You could try sim > racing > multiplayer, but what about your city building sims? Now it’s your middle category that didn’t work right.

If they’re independent tags sim, racing, multiplayer you can change any one of them independently. If any one tag changes that changes how the game is played.

Am I misreading this or are their arguments all complete nonsense? From what I can see in the article they have:

1. They have to allow third-party headphones, i.e. the anti-monopoly policy prevents a monopoly.

Among the requirements of the DMA is that Apple ensures that headphones made by other brands will work with iPhones. It said this has been a block on it releasing its live translation service in the EU as it allows rival companies to access data from conversations, creating a privacy problem.

2. Other companies will “twist laws” to prevent competition, i.e. exactly what Apple is trying to do by removing regulation. I don’t see any way to interpret this other than an outright lie, anti-monopoly policies encourage competition.

Apple said that under the DMA, “instead of competing by innovating, already successful companies are twisting the law to suit their own agendas – to collect more data from EU citizens, or to get Apple’s technology for free”.

3. Porn exists? I don’t even know what they’re trying to say with this one?

It said that rules under the act affected the way it provided users access to apps. “Pornography apps are available on iPhone from other marketplaces – apps we’ve never allowed on the App Store because of the risks they create, especially for children,” it said.

You mean like all the things in the link OP posted which you scrolled past just to be an ass in the comments?

So your suggestion is instead of any attempt at regulation people should just boycott a company years after they’ve already given that company their money, despite the fact that you admit n even more ideal circumstances boycotts still do not work?

The entire premise of your comment is absurd, but let’s assume for a moment we really do live in a world where a legal process can’t be used unless it’s successfully been used for widespread change before; what other action do you suggest people should take?

First paragraph of the article:

Earlier this month, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement added Microsoft to its list of priority targets due to the company’s intense entanglement with the Israeli military via Azure cloud and AI services. Specifically, BDS called for supporters to boycott Xbox, including Game Pass, individual games, and future purchases of consoles and peripherals. Now, in a show of solidarity, indie label Ice Water Games has removed one of its projects, open-world tactics RPG Tenderfoot Tactics, from the Xbox store.

From what I could tell the gnome teleports to a random still-covered empty tile and dies when there’s nowhere left to run.

There definitely is already a resale market for Steam accounts, mostly used by cheaters or scammers who want a legitimate-looking account with no game or trade bans.

You have stated multiple times that you have a vested interest in pushing the narrative that Funko isn’t the bad guy but somehow I’m the one that’s not arguing in good faith? Yeah, sure, whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

Making a fraud claim to a DNS provider and hosting service is the nuclear option. Literally the only thing either of those providers can do is to effectively take the entire site down. They intentionally made a misleading fraud claim instead of a DMCA takedown notice so they could force it through quicker. And you’ve completely ignored the fact that they’re relying on AI to identify these “offending” pages, and the fact that they threatened the owner’s parent. The non-apology statement they made is just icing on the cake.

You disagreeing does not make it a bad analogy.

If you hire someone to do a job and the process of doing that job results in someone being killed then yes, you absolutely are to blame, but that’s not what happened here. They didn’t hire someone to protect themselves, they contracted an AI company to delete anything which could paint them in a bad light then made claims of fraud through nonstandard channels to force their way through red tape then threatened parents of their victim when they were called out.

If you hire a hitman you’re still on the hook for murder. Making someone else do your dirty work does not absolve you. Especially when you’re a corporation and literally everything you do is through people you pay.

If you can’t read a licence plate at 20 metres you can’t safely drive. Being able to read a licence plate at 20 metres does not make you a safe driver. The test still matters.

There’s no discount there, you’re just accepting their marketing bullshit. That sounds to me like the company is double-dipping by shoving ads in your face and making the product objectively worse, then charging even more for a “premium” model where the only difference is they haven’t intentionally downgraded it.

with extras like […] no lockscreen ads

What the fuck? Why is that an extra not just the default? It’s great that this product isn’t riddled with ads, but that’s like saying it’s great a burger is not made of human shit; it’s crazy that anyone would tolerate a shit-burger in the first place.

Maybe ads are normal in the e-reader space for some reason, but that’s just insane to me.

Anything we’ve had before now wasn’t AI.

This claim doesn’t work simply due to the fact AI is a very vague term which nobody agrees on. The broadest and most literal (and possibly oldest) definition is simply any inorganic emulation of intelligence. This includes if statements and even purely mechanical devices. The narrowest definition is a computer with human-like intelligence, which is why some people claim LLMs are not AI.

Saying LLMs work differently from older AI approaches is fair, saying older approaches are not AI but the latest one is is questionable.

There’s no need to be a dick about it, just because you know a something doesn’t mean everyone else must also know it. I can guarantee there’s common terms you aren’t familiar with. Especially when you consider that this is marketing jargon with common alternate terms (eg demo reel).

Undertale music publisher issues copyright strikes against reuploads and remixes of the music and takes down an Undertale fangame for using Undertale music; Toby Fox, creator of the Undertale, disagrees with publisher.

There’s a ton of standard youtuber drama and rage bait thrown in to pad out the video, but that’s the gist.

Okay, so what are they trying to do then?

Something that is redundant is not needed, it’s a descriptive term. Layoff is a relatively recent US euphemism meaning relax or rest which became associated with non-working periods for seasonal work then evolved to cover redundancies. The US term is the weird one here.

Strongly disagree. While a lot of work does go on to art assets which should be simpler to migrate, the code is absolutely what makes the game. There are tons of very successful games with low quality or stock assets, there are very few popular games with broken code.

Even then, it’s still a lot of effort to check every asset you’re using to ensure they work as expected in your new engine.

Why did they include questions in their faq that they didn’t want to answer? “Protecting IP” isn’t a benefit to the player, and claiming there’s no performance impact “at all” from denuvo is absolutely a lie; everything a computer does uses resources and therefore impacts performance, though you could argue how noticable the impact is.