𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠

No, Ubisoft tried to offer a partial game for free, distributed via Steam, but sold paid full access for cheap on Uplay. Basically, a “purchase full access to this Steam game on our storefront so we don’t have to pay the fee we’d normally pay to get Steam to distribute the game for us”.

The issue with the Ubisoft case was that Ubisoft offered R6S in a free, restricted mode and a full mode. However, Ubisoft allowed you to obtain the free version from Steam (distributed by Steam servers) but offered a cheaper way to access the full game on Uplay only.

So you could get the full game, distributed by Steam without spending a penny on Steam, as long as you purchase it on Uplay. That’s just Ubisoft trying to dodge Steam’s policy prohibiting cheaper access to Steam distributed games on other storefronts.

It’s kinda like you providing a free game on Steam, but upon opening it you have to enter your credit card details first in order to access the rest of the game. You’re just using Steam’s services for free at that point, and that is obviously dodging the policy.

Fuck ads, obviously, but I can understand there’s confusion here.

If GPC says “do not sell my data”, but the user subsequently opts in via the cookie banner (or vice-versa), you have two conflicting signals. There’s no clear case law or anything that says what to do. Or what should happen if the same user sends different GPC signals depending on their device or browser.

Although I guess the easiest solution is just “do not sell data if any signal suggests it’s not allowed”, but that doesn’t line advertisers’ pockets I guess.

I think it’s to suggest that this fine won’t do anything to motivate Amazon to go full electric.

Apparently we stop the impending robot army by just putting up some steps at the border.

It’s some kind of thing were if she goes afk, chat can decide what the player should do. In this case they decided to mine ores.

You’d be surprised at how many old people request to be arrested by the police, it’s like a thrill ride for some of them.

We’re not even sure how to deal with intelligent life on Earth yet. Let’s figure that one out first, shall we?

Fsync is also mentioned as having issues when emulating ntsync, and the improvements for some games are still quite good.

The idea apparently was that the warmth of the rectum makes the ball very squishy again, allowing you to easily push it out again.

I know that there’s the occasional spicy comic or photoshoot, and I think I recently came across a kind of squishy ball you could insert rectally to make anal sex less messy. So there was some stuff at least.

On the flipside, an always public never-changing modlog has already and will be abused in the future (in eg the doxxing case). You can’t protect people’s privacy if the modlog can’t be hidden in some manner (which is also a GDPR-compliance issue). It’s an overlooked problem and imo severe enough to warrant a quick, but perhaps overzealous response, over a slow response. If a better solution is proposed they can always change it again and adopt it. And if it’s a dealbreaker for your instance, either defederate or fork the software (which is part of the core philosophy behind the fediverse after all). A right of reply wouldn’t remove the PII, nor would a context field or something. And if you could remove PII but it would require a context field, there’s nothing that stops an admin from hiding their actions through such a field either.

You can’t be absolute in either conviction here since they clash. The only way to solve it as far as I can see is having admins build up trust with their communities, allowing them to redact the modlog if necessary, and trusting them to do the right thing (and defederating if they don’t).

Tbf, the join-lemmy website has a server browser with a supposed “random” ordering that seems anything but random, since the same 4/5 instances always show at the top. Not sure how that one is considered “random”.

That may well be simply because transphobes tend not to be openly transphobic in non-trans-focused spaces. So the admins there have no reason to suspect transphobia yet.

A constitutional republic is a form of representative democracy.

Nuclear is a bad fit for that, because it’s too expensive and has poor “reaction times” compared to other energy sources.

Surcharges are often listed last. But it’s still a bit disingenuous to claim that the “math ain’t mathing” if the missing charges are right there.

It’s the Fuel & Environmental Surcharge of £7,50 that you conveniently cropped out:

LLMs don’t have continuous processes, there’s quite literally nothing there that could even feasibly be conscious. It takes a bunch of text as an input, puts it through a whole lot of predetermined calculations, then outputs text or an image or whatever.

There’s no emotions, no memory, no learning. If you don’t tell it something, it’s inert. It can’t experience suffering because it can’t experience anything. It’s an algorithm. It has the same claim to consciousness that WinRAR does. There’s a zero percent risk it experiences anything, let alone suffering.

Honestly, a desktop running Windows or Linux for example imo has a stronger claim to consciousness than ChatGPT does. Or maybe a Mii in Tomodachi Life, those seem to be able to become “sad”.

The environmental impact of AI is a much better ‘vegan’ reason not to use it. Although by not using it, you may in effect be “killing” it…

Erm, did you read them? The policies aren’t complex at all, just submit the issue (and proposed fix if there is one) through a secure channel, that they’re happy to help set up. If you want to disclose the vulnerability, just wait until the embargo passes so there’s time to fix and have users update. There’s not really anything else you need to do here. This is pretty standard stuff that this person just seemed too lazy to participate in.

Of the three fixes submitted, only a single one was closed since it didn’t seem very major and would be a breaking change (which shouldn’t be made without prior discussion). The other two are still open, and a maintainer is helping to add tests for the fixes (since the author didn’t add them). The only comment that was somewhat negative was that security fixes should preferably follow the established guidelines. That’s all.