temp84858696945 (u/temp84858696945)

temp84858696945 commented on Discord distances from age verification firm after ties to Peter Thiel surface kotaku.com/discord-palant... · Posted by u/thisislife2

hinata08 · 2 days ago

To do the Simpsons quotes like suggested in the article, Discord picking age verification "third party providers" definitely looks like they park various vans across the street. One of them didn't delete IDs properly and leaked them.

Now Peter Thiel's Age verification truck has been parked across the street for 2 weeks. How long does it take to deliver a pizza ?

They need to replace it with Flowers By Irene van ? Who wants to create that company and try to sell it ?

I'm dumbfounded that a big tech company that says they take age verification so seriously just subcontracts that part to this set of various subcontractor with no apparent vetting.

I do love Discord as a platform and I happily took subscriptions for me and some friends, but I don't understand who steers it.

temp84858696945 · a day ago

I get the feeling they do not in fact take age verification seriously and just want to do the low effort solution needed to satisfy various countries laws.

temp84858696945 commented on Lines of Code Are Back (and It's Worse Than Before) thepragmaticcto.com/p/lin... · Posted by u/birdculture

crazygringo · 5 days ago

I think the author is missing a key distinction.

Before, lines of code was (mis)used to try to measure individual developer productivity. And there was the collective realization that this fails, because good refactoring can reduce LoC, a better design may use less lines, etc.

But LoC never went away, for example, for estimating the overall level of complexity of a project. There's generally a valid distinction between an app that has 1K, 10K, 100K, or 1M lines of code.

Now, the author is describing LoC as a metric for determining the proportion of AI-generated code in a codebase. And just like estimating overall project complexity, there doesn't seem to be anything inherently problematic about this. It seems good to understand whether 5% or 50% of your code is written using AI, because that has gigantic implications for how the project is managed, particularly from a quality perspective.

Yes, as the author explains, if the AI code is more repetitive and needs refactoring, then the AI proportion will seem overly high in terms of how much functionality the AI proportion contributes. But at the same time, it's entirely accurate in terms of how this is possibly a larger surface for bugs, exploits, etc.

And when the author talks about big tech companies bragging about the high percentage of LoC being generated with AI... who cares? It's obviously just for press. I would assume (hope) that code review practices haven't changed inside of Microsoft or Google. The point is, I don't see these numbers as being "targets" in the way that LoC once were for individual developer productivity... there's more just a description of how useful these tools are becoming, and a vanity metric for companies signaling to investors that they're using new tools efficiently.

temp84858696945 · 4 days ago

One key point of insight is that companies are counting single line AI autocomplete as an AI generated line of code, pumping up these metrics quite significantly.

temp84858696945 commented on If you tax them, will they leave? theatlantic.com/economy/2... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

kjshsh123 · 20 days ago

There's a finite amount of money. There's not a finite amount of wealth.

Having lots of wealth does not mean other people have less. If that were the case, there'd be as much wealth today as there was 1000 years ago. Making a company and having it valued at whatever value, does not remove that amount of wealth from other people.

temp84858696945 · 20 days ago

There is not a finite about of wealth, but the wealthy are currently using their position to reduce the amount of wealth the average person has, by driving up prices of everyday requirements so that they can make more money.

It's not an issue that they are wealthy, it's that they are abusing that position to gain even more wealth at the expense of the rest of the population.

temp84858696945 commented on GOG Patrons- Join gamers keeping classics alive gog.com/en/patrons... · Posted by u/CyMonk

observationist · a month ago

It's not impossible at all. We should do 5 year copyright - 99% of all commercial profit of all media is collected within 5 years of publishing.

Copyright is granted to media creators in order to incentivize creativity and contribution to culture. It's not granted so as to empower large collectives of lawyers and wealthy people to purchase the rights and endlessly nickel and dime the public for access to media.

Make it simple and clear. You get 5 years total copyright - no copying, no commercial activity or derivatives without express, explicit consent, require a contract. 5 years after publishing, you get another 5 years of limited copyright - think of it as expanded fair use. A maximum of 5% royalties from every commercial use, and unlimited non-commercial use. After 10 years, it goes into public domain.

You can assign or sell the rights to anyone, but the initial publication date is immutable, the clock doesn't reset. You can immediately push to public domain, or start the expanded fair use period early.

No exceptions, no grandfathering.

There's no legitimate reasons we should be allowing giant companies like Sony and HBO and Paramount to grift in perpetuity off of the creations and content of artists and writers. This is toxic to culture and concentrates wealth and power with people that absolutely should not control the things they do, and a significant portion of the wealth they accumulate goes into enriching lawyers whose only purpose in life is to enforce the ridiculous and asinine legal moat these companies and platforms and people have paid legislators to enshrine in law.

Make it clear and simple, and it accomplishes the protection of creators while enriching society. Nobody loses except the ones who corrupted the system in the first place.

We live in a digital era, we should not be pretending copyright ideas based on quill and parchment are still appropriate to the age.

And while we're at it, we should legally restrict distribution of revenues from platforms to a maximum of 30% - 70% at minimum goes to the author. The studio, agent, platform, or any other distribution agent all have to divvy up at most 30%.

No more eternal estates living off of the talent and creations of ancestors. No more sequestration of culturally significant works to enrich grifters.

This would apply to digital assets, games, code, anything that gets published. Patents should be similarly updated, with the same 5 and 10 year timers.

Sure, it's not 100% optimal, but it gets a majority of the profit to a majority of the creators close enough and it has a clear and significant benefit to society within a short enough term that the tradeoff is clearly worth it.

Empowering and enabling lawyers and rent seekers to grift off of other peoples talent and content is a choice, we don't have to live like that.

temp84858696945 · a month ago

I'm fairly certain that would not work at all for media such as sci-fi/fantasy books, where a system like this would result in people just forever reading older books which are free and effectively kill the market.

There is a limited amount of time to read in a day and the amount of 10+ year old content that is still amazing is more then anyone could ever read, and it's hard to compete with free.

I think video games is actually kinda an anomaly when it comes to copyright because they have been, on average, getting better and better then games released even in the recent past, mostly due to hardware getting better and better. Also any multiplayer game has the community issue where older games tend to no longer have a playerbase to play with.

Same could be said about movies/tv shows that rely on CGI up until somewhat recently where the CGI has pretty much plateaued.

temp84858696945 commented on US Government threatens Harvard with foreign student ban bbc.com/news/articles/c1e... · Posted by u/intunderflow

oldmariner · 10 months ago

You can be confidently wrong. It seems like you just don't like the thinking/reasons they did.

temp84858696945 · 10 months ago

It seems really clear that the order as operations is as follows:

1. Administration makes demands of Harvard to change the way it's operating to fall in line.

2. Harvard stands up against these demands.

3. Administration is using every means possible to punish Harvard for daring taking a stand against it.

This is what dictatorships look like.

temp84858696945 commented on Canadian woman sent to Arizona detention for trying to renew her TN visa vancouversun.com/news/bc-... · Posted by u/jeromegv

selfhoster · a year ago

"I don’t know how someone in her position can be subject to this"

She broke the law, it doesn't matter whether she is attractive, affluent and Canadian.

temp84858696945 · a year ago

You know the game Paper's Please?

Where you are running border security for a totalitarian communist state?

Even that game doesn't want you to detain people for having an improper work visa for entry, just turn them away.

temp84858696945 commented on YouTube Premium Lite: Ad-Free Viewing for $7.99/Month blog.youtube/news-and-eve... · Posted by u/ChrisArchitect

gruez · a year ago

>Coincides suspiciously with the removal of uBlock on Chrome.

When was it removed? It's still on the chrome web store, and google's docs suggests they were removing manifest v2 extensions as early as October last year, so if they launched premium lite any time in the past 4 months, you could have plausibly claimed "Coincides suspiciously with the removal of uBlock on Chrome".

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/develop/migrate...

temp84858696945 · a year ago

For me it was removed 3 days ago, and around 70%~ of my friend group had it removed around the same time.

Swapped to firefox not looking back.

temp84858696945 commented on Helldivers 2 PSN account linking update will not be moving forward twitter.com/PlayStation/s... · Posted by u/tech234a

topspin · 2 years ago

I can't argue that's it's not popular. I just can't imagine why. Watching gameplay footage it looks like any of dozens of similar games. TPS, swarming mobs, orbital strike, woohoo. Would someone tell what this has that makes it so appealing?

temp84858696945 · 2 years ago

They hit the theme/immersion perfectly for me.

Lots of other games it feels like you are playing a game, there are parts where you like "yah this is like this because game mechanics" that break immersion a lot.

Almost nothing in Helldivers 2 breaks your immersion.

temp84858696945 commented on Helldivers 2 Removed from Purchase on Steam in over 150 Countries thegamer.com/helldivers-2... · Posted by u/marijnz

SXX · 2 years ago

This is a big deal because PSN not even available in all EU countries. E.g there is no PSN in: Andorra, Estonia, Latvia. In Ukraine for example you can only register PSN account if you own PlayStation.

temp84858696945 · 2 years ago

Also, they legally cannot sell the game in some EU countries and not others, due to EU single market rules.

So yah, they are kinda fucked if the EU comes after them legally.

temp84858696945 commented on Helldivers 2 Removed from Purchase on Steam in over 150 Countries thegamer.com/helldivers-2... · Posted by u/marijnz

gambiting · 2 years ago

>>But it was hidden

When you start the game, you literally get a full screen banner that says a PSN account is required to play and you must sign in. It's just that until now you could click cancel and the game would still launch.

How can anyone call it "hidden" is literally beyond me. It's not hidden on page 527 of the EULA or something - it's literally said explicitly on a full screen banner shown to every player who has started the game. Not to mention it's mentioned on the Steam store page.

temp84858696945 · 2 years ago

Not all players got this banner, especially players from countries where they cannot sign up for PSN accounts.

They never should have allowed sales in countries where people cannot legally sign up for a PSN account. Especially when they allowed those players to play for months and are now "banning" them, preventing them from playing the game they paid for.

In addition, literally the only place where this requirement was stated was the steam sale page - the EULA had no mention of the PSN account, Sony's webpage explicitly stated you did not require an account to play playstation games on PC.