It's funny how there's always a few people going "it won't solve the problem 100% so it's pointless". The goal is to reduce screen time for kids, this will do that.

So one tweet from Trump from back when he wasn't relevant in US politics yet and a single post from Rush Limbaugh, someone who only MAGA types listen to, was MAGA being "effective in claiming the "real" number was the labor force participation being low."? What a laugh, this was never a major thing during the Obama administration.

Not even remotely what I said.

Jacking up prices when their product is already having a hard time finding a significant presence in the market is what seems like a bad business model to me.

The fact that Sony is making their games less affordable to people doesn't tie to increased piracy? I probably would have at least looked into piracy myself if I couldnt get cheap used games back when I was too broke for PC gaming and was doing console instead.

It is for me. Usually tech companies try to get some significant market presence before ramping up fees and extra costs for the consumer. Last I heard these things were barely selling

If I was a console gamer it's the end of the used market I'd be pissed about. I know in the times in my life I couldn't afford PC gaming and did console instead 90% of the games I bought were used. The fact that modern physical copies of games are basically just installers for downloading the game didn't change that either.

No kidding, there would be serious issues with what is happening here even if the phone was 100% American made and of good quality.

"the future of film making", not the current reality. Big difference there. Given how far we've come so quickly I think it's well within reason that within my life time the results of AI film making will be both indistinguishable from our current methods and cheaper than even $400k to make a movie (although that's less than the cost of a house in half the country so isn't that crazy of a cost to make cinema).

I'm not talking about how Hollywood does or will use AI, I'm talking about when the technology matures more and the potentials for small film makers that AI will bring and they are absolutely huge. The sky will be the limit for creatives as they will no longer be limited by money. Cinema will become as accessible to artists as painting is and I can't wait for that to happen.

I think the future of film making is a small handful of creatives using AI software to make a movie and overall I think this will be good for cinema. While I do think it will be a shame to lose all of the acting and craft person jobs (amongst others) making movie making cheap enough for the common person to enter into the field without major financial backers means opening the way for a lot more creatives to make good cinema.

And before I hear it, yes this will mean a ton more crap movies out there as well. If we can find the good stuff to watch on YouTube though then we'll be able to find the good stuff for cinema under the conditions I describe as well.

Basically, an era where big Hollywood will no longer be able to act as gatekeepers to what we watch? Count me in.

That's fine, I'll just play them a few years from now on an emulator and Sony won't make any money off it.

I couldn't agree more with you here. I'm lucky enough to work for a good employer right now but have worked for awful ones in the past. The improvement in my general wellbeing moving from bad to good was significant enough to where it's become a significant part of my calculations in regard to whether I should change jobs/employer or not.

If that was a viable solution to employer abuse or poor practices we wouldn't have needed to pass all the labor laws we have that have dramatic improve things like work place safety.

Your citation is some one said so? I'm asking for data backing what you are saying. In other words, a proper citation. An authoritative person saying something doesn't make something reality. For instance, Trump says things all the time that don't match up to reality.

Probably because we were busy learning what constitutes a proper citation rather than off walking around being condescending to people. What should I expect though from someone who believes a state with property values like California's can also be a hell-scape at the same time. Hint: People don't pay California money to live in a shitty place.

And Brin makes up half of all billionaire wealth in California?