bitfucker

No, MSI or ASUS or really any other hardware company (that primarily sells hardware) makes money from selling hardware. Valve main source of income is their steam service, not the deck. For any deck they sold, they could make a loss but they gain revenue by a first time gamer. Much like how console can be sold at a loss but making the profit from the game they sold. The primary difference between traditional console and steam deck is that any hardware competitor to steam deck is still a win for valve since they also mostly profit from sales on their steam service. Thus my point, any hardware company is not valve primary rival since if a consumer chose steam deck, valve wins, but if they chose the competitor, valve wins too. Epic, Ubisoft, and EA or whoever else that tries to provide the same service like valve should be their primary competitor.

Edit: my point being, the deck doesn't need to be faster, or more power efficient, or more ergonomic. They just need to popularize the form factor. The fact that valve makes the deck so awesome on release, only to be overtaken by another hardware is not a loss for valve.

Wasn't it skyrim?

To be honest, any hardware company can't really compete with valve toe to toe since valves can cut cost and sell at a loss. But I am interested in how the so-called steam competitor would make the same handheld device. I'm waiting for you Tim Epic.

Yes, and hence my comment on flatpak which turns out is false (that the upstream developer is usually the distributor/packager too). And the other still applies, distro usually adds a specific tag anyway for their refresh. Like that one time xz on rolling debian was named something x.y.z-really-a.b.c.

I think flatpak packagers should also append the specific tag too if that is the case. Like, x.y.z-flatpak-w where w can be the build release version

Nay, I just replied to you in the context of the commenter. The other commenter stated about real life children so your point about hentai is irrelevant to him. I do know the legal definition of CSAM is the end result and not the act. And hence, why I stated that yours is a different discussion entirely.

Edit: Sorry I read it again and I think I didn't get my point across very well. I think your point about artwork falls into the debate about the definition of CSAM. Why? Because the word abuse implies an abusive act is being done. But the current definition states that what matters is the end result only. This poses a problem in my opinion because it slightly touch your freedom of expression. By the current definition, art has its limit

Yeah, I do enjoy them more than any other cartoon. But both makoto shinkai movie (your name, and suzume) is quite famous too so that is why I think a lot of people will enjoy the reference.

I am still baffled by the rat dick illustration that got past the review

But the publisher who published it should be liable too. Wtf is their job then? Parasiting off of public funded research?

I sure hope so. It is important because otherwise copyright will mean jackshit.

*Rant I truly hope politicians spend their time on more pressing issues than squabbling among themselves. Climate change, technological advancement that outpaces our legal framework, consumer protection. So much shit to do.

I've commented it on the other post about the same thing. But I still think it is funny.

There is an article where it looks at the earthquake pattern and correlate it to Makoto Shinkai movie, Suzume. And now this meteor lol.

(And as usual, don't take it too seriously. This is just a fun tidbit ;)

Anonymized is still risky as people speech has a pattern. All it takes is one nutjob to dox and now everyone has a problem.

Edit to add further information why anonymization is hard. US survey and statistics data is jittered in a random way to protect the privacy since it is possible to backtrack the statistics to the person who answers the survey. I think it was explained in a minutephysics video.

That is a whole government department dealing with sensitive data and mathematical proof that their survey result is anonymous. What can a law firm do to guarantee anonymization? Remember, guarantee is a strong word here as it carries legal implication for the firm. If the firm cannot guarantee anonymization, then the company would not want to be liable when shit hits the fan.

I feel his sentiment as he is someone that grows from a small, family-like group which he leads. But that model indeed is incompatible with the pace that they are expanding. He saw that he is not fit for the role of CEO and has since stepped down. But yes, I know he still has a major stake in the company. It is kind of a complex problem. You can't stop the owner from wanting to be the janitor at his own company.