mechoman444

I use Linux on everything except my gaming rig… There are games that I like that only run on windows. As soon as that’s handled I’ll make the switch on they machine too.

I’ve still got a year of updates on my Verizon of 10. I’m going to use them.

I think you’re the one who rated me down to zero. Normally I wouldn’t care, but I’m bringing it up for a reason. If you did rate me down, it would only be because I stated that Al has benefits, which it objectively does. That would mean you did it solely because my statement conflicts with your ideology, which is the same behavior you see from conspiracy theorists and radicalized right-wing groups.

I’m correct that Al has beneficial applications. That is not up for debate.

Are you so locked into your own rhetoric that you can’t even acknowledge that?

Haywire? That all sounds legit to me!

There are things that AI does well and certain features should be available in an operating system. For example the AI features on my Samsung phone I actually really like them I use them all the time.

Especially the highlighting feature for copy and paste absolutely fantastic for my work.

But what Microsoft is doing is just all intrusive AI it’s completely unnecessary and nobody wants it.

Ya. Like popups and cookie notices.

My wife and I have never experienced this. 🤷

Very interesting though.

They meant that in terms of infiltration they’re becoming more humanoid at an exponential level

You know back in my day websites would protect themselves, as was the style at the time.

Now a days they just get cloudflare and put up a cookie notice.

Just one of those things lazy devs do.

Look, the reason Concord crashed and burned isn’t some deep philosophical mystery. It’s because the game simply wasn’t good enough to survive in a genre that’s already stacked with better, cheaper options.

It launched with no real identity. Everything about it felt like a watered-down version of other hero shooters, same structure, same archetypes, none of the charm. Characters were forgettable, abilities didn’t mesh well with the modes, and the balance was all over the place. The movement was slow, the time-to-kill was absurdly long, and fights dragged on like you were playing in molasses. That’s not “a bold design choice,” that’s just poor pacing.

Then you add the fact that they tried to charge forty bucks for something that, by every metric, should’ve been free-to-play. On top of that, content was thin at launch. Maps were bland, the mode selection was tiny, and there wasn’t enough variety to keep anyone invested. When a live-service shooter launches with barely anything to do, the writing is already on the wall.

Players didn’t walk away because they “didn’t give it a chance.” They walked away because the game gave them no reason to stay. Sales were abysmal, concurrency numbers cratered immediately, and Sony pulled the plug in record time. That’s not player bias or community toxicity; that’s a product failing on its own merits.

You can dress it up however you want, but the reality stands: Concord entered a crowded market with nothing special to offer, priced itself like it was a premium experience, and then delivered something that felt half-thought-out and generic. It wasn’t some misunderstood masterpiece. It was just a bad game.

I agree but that doesn’t qualify it for preservation.

There are ways around that kind of stuff even for the most stringent of governments. Of course inherently there’s always a risk you asked me if I’m willing to take it and I said yes.

Here lies the core of the disconnect. The property is not yours. When someone takes or uses something that does not belong to them, against the owner’s wishes, they have committed a violation. The owner’s reasons are irrelevant; it is their property.

Consider this scenario: you write a book you do not wish to publish. Then an external entity steps in and announces that they will publish it and distribute it for free. You would rightfully feel that your autonomy had been overridden.

This is why copyright laws exist. They can be exploited, like any system, but they remain the most effective framework we currently have.

Sony isn’t giving the game away for free you’re taking it by force.

Yes. You pirate anything?

I’ve noticed here on Lemmy that the general user base just doesn’t like copyright laws or have a complete lack of knowledge of what a copyright is how they function and why it’s beneficial to copyright works.

It’s actually really frustrating mainly because you get downvoted for supporting copyright which is insane.

• The term endures for the life of the author plus 70 years.

• For works made for hire or anonymous/ pseudonymous works, the term is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever expires first.

Dude. I noticed that there is a collective misunderstanding of copyright and intellectual property on Lemmy y’all need to read some wikis or something.

Guys, the guy sucked a grown man’s dick… Its not like he sexually assaulted… Wait… It’s not like he raped kids… O… It’s not like he makes fun of the mentally disabled people… Shit!

Imagine you create a product that is mechanically functional but fundamentally terrible. Only a tiny group is willing to pay for it, and even that isn’t enough to break even. You have no choice but to pull it from the market and discard it. Then the government steps in and starts distributing that product for free. This is your personal intellectual property, you no longer control it or own it.

Your comment is deeply frustrating. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright and intellectual property, which is frankly astounding.

They’re not. Sony refunded all copy’s sold. Sony lost a metric butt ton of money on the game realized it was a massive ideological and developmental mistake and tried to correct course.

For some reason people are being super stubborn about this objectively terrible game.

Jesus just let it die.

No you didn’t. ??