If you think steam is free for developers while unreal isn't, you should try selling things on steam.

You'll realize that steam is about as "free" as "unreal". As in, not at all.

I was looking for comparisons to other historic whores tanking great men.

Ironically, the GOAT in this female dominated field, like in all other fields is a man. His actions led to destruction of a massive nation.

With EU and the US already being on gas instead of coal, the percentage of renewable for China doesn't give them much to brag about till they actually roll out net zero.

They are soaking up the extra capacity caused by their industrial policy of wage suppression for industrial expansion, but even for them long term storage is too expensive.

Much more interesting thing to do math on:

Is this woman the most expensive prostitute in human history?

That's because EVs are perfect for taxis. Many short distances, never far from a charging point and time inbetween rides where you can recharge in the supermarket parking lot while getting a bite to eat. And in the city, with stop-and-go traffic, EV are much better at handling that than ICEs who hate that. Plus the lower cost-per-km-driven matters even more when it's a profit margin thing.

You should argue this in courts. They consistently found otherwise.

The sole exception is the curious case where generative AI was intentionally prompted by a different AI. I.e. human didn't have direct participation, and never claimed participation. Essentially, it was a test by an activist to see if copyright could be assigned to AI.

Court found that it could not, and basis for decision was that copyright holder must be a person.

Hard disagree on leeches part. They make Unreal Engine, which powers basically all of the most graphically intensive games out today. A significant percentage of games on steam are UE games.

So by your own logic of "things on one store are made with tech developed by the other store's owner", they are not leeches.

I think this "those are hate are everything bad" attitude needs to stop. There are plenty of things to critique Epic for. You don't need to make criticism look less appropriate by claiming that they are also "other bad things that they are patently not".

I remember that 2024 finding. It made rounds in the medical researcher side of X, and consensus seemed to reach the following conclusion: Condition seems to hit almost exclusively if not exclusively near terminal diabetes type 2 patients, in whom the rapid and permanent crash of sugar levels in tissues that have adapted to being massively overdosed by it is the likely cause.

Those drugs literally cure the problem that causes the disease immediately, as there's a significant percentage of near-terminal patients that are near terminal because they can't stop massively overeating just... stop overeating after the first injection. But they obviously don't cure the side effects of the disease, such as damage done by type 2 to tissues. Then rapid and permanent sugar level crash in tissues that are used to being massively overdosed with it for years may cause some additional damage, and in very rare cases, it can hit optic nerves.

The choice in those cases is almost universally "certain death of type 2's consequences within a few weeks or a tiny chance that curing the illness takes out some already damaged tissues out permanently with single digit number of cases recorded going permanently blind while their extremities stop rotting while patient is still alive". So it's a pretty great dice to roll.

Epic's problem isn't with that. It's with the fact that they built a consumer store that focuses on serving the sellers first and foremost.

Sweeney himself stated that this is going to be their competitive edge back in the day when they started the store.

Turns out, sellers may love you lots for making it awful for buyers with no key store functions like being able to post bad reviews, or have discussion forums to point out problems with games, but those same people also are buyers. And a lot of other buyers look for opinions on the game before buying.

May Gaben live forever, because otherwise the "fuck the consumer, it's all about the seller" storefronts like Epic (and basically every other major digital store today) will become a norm. And you'll have to learn to love eating shit. Because that's all that will be on offer.

It's sad, because once Epic's leadership realized that this isn't going to work, they were locked into the model by their deals with their sellers that there will be no steam style consumer friendly features on their store. So they started giving games for free instead. Except that most of those free games are even worse than Epic store itself.

Their latest "please don't pay attention to us not being able to have consumer friendly features" marketing drive has been about pretending that getting launcher start a couple of seconds faster is the thing people care about.

Considering all the bitching and moaning from Epic's leadership about how bad and evil Steam is with their "monopoly", they don't seem to be stopping them putting their launcher on SteamOS.

Weird, that.

Of course you can hold copyright over AI-generated output.

What you cannot hold copyright over is AI-generated output that didn't have human input. That was the subject of the court case you're likely thinking about.

His first theatrical release is already coming, and hilariously he played actor politics very intelligently, to the point where relevant mainstream publications have posted mostly positive things about him.

Because he still hires voice actors. The people who have been by far the most vocal and militant about being replaced by AI. Of all people, he got the most rabid anti-AI crown on his side by selling "we keep the voice actors, but replace everyone else" to them. And it seems to have worked.

That is the same argument that was made about the first Star Wars movie.

Sounds like it will spawn a massive growth of the genre, like that movie did.

He already made two 20 minute films, but when he went full pro, he privated them.

You can still find them on pirate sites. Look for his screen name and name of the short films: "Patchwright" and "Pomegranate".

As for "but this genre is done to death in movies", 1920s called. They want their argument back. Also 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s. They all want it back.

To be fair, this does look like someone who doesn't know how to use generative AI but knows how to make films, trying to make films using generative AI. It takes a different skill set to do the latter, one that needs to be developed. It's derivative from the former, but no the same thing.

There already are directors who do amazing films with it, using the same tool (seedance 2.5).

For example, the famous Gossip Goblin:

https://www.youtube.com/@Gossi...

His first theatrical release is coming already:

https://godsdontgivegifts.com/