150 million is nothing for what Linus has control over. That’s like the combined net worth of 100 of the top paid strippers in Vegas. (I’m going by vice documentary numbers)
What’s your point? Socialism doesn’t mean be you have to be poor, socialism is about getting the full value of your work. If your work is so valuable it makes you a multi-millionaire then from a socialist perspective that’s completely fine. Your point makes sense only if you have no fucking clue what socialism is.
Linus Torvalds net worth could be way higher if he took jobs a big tech companies (that were easily available to him) instead of choosing a career path that ensure Linux’ independence.
I mean, gabe has yet to do anything to piss me off yet. At this point I’m looking directly at the head of whatever organization.
Also this is a dumb take, if everyone had the same ideals on Lemmy then you would be part of this, you’re seeing different posts by different people and conflating the two
Valve has faced criticisms from former employees in the past for its toxic work culture. And Gabe Newell, being the CEO, has a lot of power over that.
Just because the places you frequent on the internet don’t shove criticism of Valve down your throat the same way it would do so for, say, Epic Games, doesn’t mean there’s nothing wrong with Valve as a company. All the pro-Valve/Steam information you get and the general sentiment towards Gabe Newell from people on Lemmy and Reddit are pure, undiluted corporate propaganda. That it comes from Steam users rather than being something Steam directs and pays for doesn’t change what it is.
you’re seeing different posts by different people and conflating the two
This ignores the reality that Lemmy is, at least in the part of it consisting of lemmy.ml, lemmy.world, and others, overwhelmingly leftist. This comment also attempts to dismiss the underlying criticism that Lemmy as a whole has a culture that, much like reddit, seeks to pick and choose its targets under capitalism and actively engages in corporate apologia, like in this post, while collectively professing a broad ethos that is outright hypocritical when viewed in the light of that other behavior. And if you think Lemmy is amenable to a diverse array of economic opinions, then maybe you should try posting a “Capitalism Appreciation Thread” on a major lemmy instance and see how that goes over.
If you’re admitting that part of or the majority of Lemmy is leftist. (Which, who cares) Then say that. don’t post Lemmy: also lemmy:, (meaning everyone) and try to backtrack after the fact.
Everyone has accused every workplace of toxic culture. At this point I’m pretty sure going to someone and asking them to do their fucking job is toxicity.
Everyone has accused every workplace of toxic culture. At this point I’m pretty sure going to someone and asking them to do their fucking job is toxicity.
We have reached levels of bootlicking with this comment that shouldn’t be physically possible.
Ah Of course. It is impossible to criticize any actions taking place by any entity against a capitalist entity without defending capitalism yourself. Cehckmate liberals.
It is impossible to criticize any actions taking place by any entity against a capitalist entity without defending capitalism yourself.
It depends on the purpose and shape of that criticism. If you criticize a communist nation banning a particular corporation’s marketplace from their country on the basis that doing so is a part of a grift that seeks to engineer a national-level monopoly over a particular corporate sector by banning external competition, then, sure, that’s a valid criticism because the intent is innately unethical. But if the Vietnamese video game industry is actively harmed by Steam, an American company, using its vast resources to outcompete Vietnamese publishers, then what is your opposition to this that doesn’t encompass a de facto defense of free market capitalism?
I don’t think steam is doing that the government of vietnam isn’t claiming they are banning steam for that reason. What is happening is that the government of vietnam is actively hurting their domestic video game developers because they have instituted onerous “government scrutiny” whereas if you want to publish on Steam it costs like $150 and an email address.
The problem solely lies with the Vietnamese government, no where else.
But if the Vietnamese video game industry is actively harmed by Steam, an American company, using its vast resources to outcompete Vietnamese publishers, then what is your opposition to this that doesn’t encompass a de facto defense of free market capitalism?
Not GP but the article didn’t say that Steam outcompeted local developers by “using its vast resources”. On the contrary, it alleged that local developers cannot compete on Steam with international developers, because those do not have to apply the local regulations:
Citing it as “an injustice to domestic publishers”, Vietnamese studios reportedly say that local game development “will die” if Steam is able to keep releasing games without the same government scrutiny as domestic games.
A somewhat shaky argument considering that the same is true for many other countries applying their own local regulations, which Vietnamese developers do not have to follow.
But anyway, what is my opposition that doesn’t encompass a de facto defence of free market capitalism? The damage to the users. What about all the Vietnamese people losing access to Steam’s online features, which are arguably necessary nowadays for many games, especially multiplayer ones. And for what? To benefit Vietnamese businesses? Not very socialist of you comrade Vietnam. smh
In any case, this is all pure speculation at this point, since both parties have yet to make a statement about the situation:
At the time of writing, there’s been no formal word from Vietnamese authorities or Steam about the “ban”, […]
That said, my current head cannon goes something like this:
Vietnamese devs: Dude, these regulations on games are killing us. We can’t compete on Steam with games like these. The Party: Okay we hear you. bans Steam Vietnamese devs: Wait, what? (← we are here)
it alleged that local developers cannot compete on Steam with international developers, because those do not have to apply the local regulations:
That’s not really contrary to the point, but orthogonal to it. Steam is outcompeting on the basis that it receives special privileges on the basis of its international status. It’s still outcompeting because of a resource advantage. But that advantage exists because domestic developers are disadvantaged by virtue of national regulations over domestic developers.
what is my opposition that doesn’t encompass a de facto defence of free market capitalism? The damage to the users. What about all the Vietnamese people losing access to Steam’s online features, which are arguably necessary nowadays for many games, especially multiplayer ones.
Your argument is the same kind of “consumer rights” argument that I’ve seen everywhere on the internet, because you are implying that there is material harm to the people of Vietnam caused by Steam’s banning. Which is a fairly specious argument. It’s the loss of a luxury item. No one is materially harmed by it. It’s not like Vietnam banned insulin. And while you may not use the same language, you are effectively saying that every consumer on the planet should have free access to the best products available for whatever “thing” they want. In this case, video games. It’s a de facto argument for free market economic policies.
That’s not really contrary to the point, but orthogonal to it.
What? According to the article based on which we are discussing this news that is the point (allegedly). And it is unrelated to your point yes. I’m not entirely sure where you even came up with your point to be honest.
Your argument is the same kind of “consumer rights” argument that I’ve seen everywhere on the internet, because you are implying that there is material harm to the people of Vietnam caused by Steam’s banning. Which is a fairly specious argument. It’s the loss of a luxury item. No one is materially harmed by it.
I guess the consumers, i.e. the people of Vietnam in possession of this luxury item, would disagree with that assessment. Especially if they have sunk significant finances and/or time into their Steam account.
It’s not like Vietnam banned insulin.
Nobody said it is?
And while you may not use the same language, you are effectively saying that every consumer on the planet should have free access to the best products available for whatever “thing” they want. In this case, video games.
Again, what? I’m saying people will want to keep access to something they already paid for, their games on Steam and the according metadata like savegames, multiplayer access, and such. Not sure how you managed to pull this interpretation out of what I said, but be assured it’s incorrect.
It’s a de facto argument for free market economic policies.
Since the whole logic chain that led you to this conclusion was already riddled with errors from the very beginning this is simply a non sequitur.
Valve support has historically been pretty awesome. They even replaced an index controller nearly a year out of warranty. Granted their controllers have a shit switch and they break after a few hundred hours, but good on support for being bros.
That’s basically all corporate entities. They’re not beholden to the workers, the consumers, or the general public and instead answer to people generally trying to milk everything as hard as possible.
Valve wouldn’t exist at it is if it was public and might not exist as it is if it wasn’t for Newell (and I say that as a person that’s very critical of Valve, they’re still very far from how bad they could be considering their position)
Not gonna defend corporations here, but valve isnt public. They are privately owned by the bosses and employees, valve has one of the lowest turnover rates in the industry. It is quite difficult to get a job there for that reason. So they are actually quite beholden to their workers.
Isn’t this generally how the big tech firms generate dark profiles on people? Of the people who don’t explicitly exist on their database. Take the intersection of data from family events. The people not in their database of known profiles are also likely family. Do the same for friend events. Take the intersection of those peoples interests. You’ll be knowing a lot about someone who never told you anything about themselves.
You can run but you can’t hide. Crazy times we live in.
They have to comply with GDPR as their website is accessible from EU countries, as long as they have data to identify a specific EU citizen.
So in theory, if you’re from EU you could put your name and surname on your Steam profile, have it archived and then file a GDPR request to have all of your data removed
They have to comply with GDPR as their website is accessible from EU countries, as long as they have data to identify a specific EU citizen.
There’s currently American laws that if not followed, States have a right to pursue a lawsuit. Many American companies shrug and wait for the paperwork. Often, it takes a few months for that paperwork, and then years before it moves through the courts. Imagine a EU company getting that paperwork. Besides the initial “I’m in the EU, I don’t have to follow your American laws”, the court case would take YEARS to materialize.
Now flip that for American companies following EU rules.
A law is only as strong as those who enforce it. Look at Twitter. How many warnings will the EU give and still not do anything about it?
I’m not saying this to wave my freedom around. This is just reality. Major American companies to this day still are lax around GDPR. So a small 1-person company is going to shrug and do whatever they want. Until they do something outrageous like terrorism or CP, they’ll at most get a strongly written letter.
And by then, they’ll just bankrupt their company and start a new one.
Again, not saying that to be a jerk. I’ve been on that side of arguing that our products should follow GDPR, watching some manager tell me fuck off, then literally nothing happening for years.
Twitter confirmed that the breach occurred on November 4, 2014. Yet, the company remained unable to determine who was affected by the issue before September 5, 2017. Between September 5, 2017, and January 11, 2019, Twitter’s breach also impacted users from the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA).
Which to be fair, is a more than enough law for 98%++ of the population and all companies, too. Just not for the biggest companies who really ought to always be upgraded one “unit”. That is, instead of 500 Kiloeuros, they get to pay 500 Megaeuros.
Yeah that’s not great but not too surprising when it comes to the Irish DPA.
They are seemingly very corrupt. They pretty much refuse to fine any of the large US corporations like Facebook.
And while they have actually fined Facebook multiple times that’s because the rest of the EU (EDPB) forced them too. It wasn’t a willing decision on their part. They have also cried to the Irish government (or parliament) to get a new law that makes it possible to get the reporting party (I.E. normal EU citizens and NGOs) to pretty much sign a NDA regarding everything in the case.
Why are they like this? Why do they interpret the GDPR differently than the rest of the EU and coincidentally they interpret the law in Facebook’s favour?
I have no evidence but to me it seems extremely likely that they are directly bribed or more likely IMO is that Ireland wants to keep all the tax avoiding US companies in Ireland and they do this to keep them happy and when they get fined anyways they can blame the EU for the fines.
Oh and Ireland is still the one that’s actually issuing the fine, so they get to keep the money even when they were forced to do it.
On another note, I suspect that DPAs are more eager to fine when it’s something that’s done explicitly bad. Like refusing to delete data.
I mean, this sucks, but I also wonder how this could be fixed. If you read up what absolutely benign stuff like your physical screen resolution coupled with how quickly you move your mouse coupled with your possible languages ad companies can use to uniquely identify you among the whole world visiting their page, it’s not a long throw at all to uniquely identify someone based on their steam friends.
Just note that a PS account is required to access the MULTIPLAYER section of the game but as far as everyone is concerned singleplayer doesn’t require one.
Sony: we make so much money selling these games to a giant pc audience;
Also Sony: what if we restricted them geographically a huge amount and require them to go through extra steps so we can (???) which allows us to (??? + Harvest data)?
steam
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.