Comment So far, so what (Score 1) 56
Sounds interesting, but nothing concrete yet.
Wake me up when there's an actual interface that I can ask 3 questions of (like a genie with 3 wishes) and maybe a local instance I can run in virtualization.
Sounds interesting, but nothing concrete yet.
Wake me up when there's an actual interface that I can ask 3 questions of (like a genie with 3 wishes) and maybe a local instance I can run in virtualization.
If you think software never breaks, I have a bunch of 5.25" disks somewhere that want to have an argument with you.
It's a complete strawman to argue that physical things break. If I buy music, digitally, that won't break and yet nobody sane would expect that the band can at some random time in the future say "we revoke all our music". I can also think of a number of physical things that unless I mistreat them will easily survive me and three generations down the line.
This is not about replacements, it's about taking the product sold away but keeping the money.
And what stops you from making a seperate license to play on the servers provided by the company that is based on good behaviour and/or monthly subscription fees?
This is what the Stop Killing Games movement is also about: Sure, we understand that eventually you wind down the online servers, no problem. But if I paid for a game, why should you have the right to disable it? With no other things I buy can you at any time later come to my house and take them back or disable them. Not with my microwave, not with my shower, not with my lights.
Sure, but it'll be better when algae is not in the whitehouse.
So, "People With Disabilities Don't Exist" then?
My father was recently paralyzed by Guillain-Barré, so I'll let him know, thanks.
Buy indie games.
It's only the big players who have these delusions.
I'm not saying the right answer is to get a refund. The right answer is to not make the license revokable.
For the theater comparison: If the theatre would invalidate my ticket and throw me out mid-movie, you can be sure that I'd ask for a refund. And in any sane jurisdiction, I'd get it.
Mostly, the difference is some legales, but the kicker is: "revocable". That is an insane difference. I'm quite sure it doesn't say you get a refund if they revoke your license.
Oh god. If I spent enough time digging through my ancient Slashdot posts, somewhere back there there are posts of me going, "While I loved the strategy behind Falcon 9, I'm really not keen on this plan to make Starship out of huge carbon fibre tanks, that sounds like a really failure-prone solution..." I'm glad they only spent like a year on that idea before deciding it was dumb; somewhere back there there's also a bunch of posts of me cheering their switch to steel
Electron has been getting by on CF, and honestly I'm impressed, but they've also been only working with very small launch vehicles thusfar. We'll see how neutron goes...
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot to say about printing small rocket parts, such as for the engines. But they were printing basically sheet metal cylinders, which is such an immensely slow and inefficient way to go about it, and it left them with parts that were heavier and less aerodynamic (rougher surface). Crazy that idea ever got any funding.
The one seen over Moscow might have been, with a bit more thrust...
"SapceX has got to be a huge scam too" - SpaceX launches the vast majority of the world's commercial cargo to orbit. The Falcon 9 FT has the highest success rate of any rocket with a statistically significant number of launches under its belt, and is dirt cheap. SpaceX's core operations are roughly breakeven, but that's including subsidizing the development of Starship. Starlink is a money printer.
There are lots of things sketchy about the SpaceX IPO, to say the least, but SpaceX, as a company, has been extremely successful with rocketry.
MidJourney was the first sizable AI company to become profitable, having done so back in 2022.
If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly. -- G.K. Chesterton