More like, they need you to believe it’s dangerous so they have another thing for the police state to take away your rights to “protect” you from.

The Apple user’s mind cannot comprehend this…

I’ll go!

Unironically, yes.

I’m glad they’re calling them vigilantes, because a vigilante is someone who punishes crimes outside the bounds of the law. Good to see media acknowledging that Flock cameras are criminal.

Stage 1: You pay for it, it is the product

Stage 2: It is free, you are the product (enshittification)

Stage 3: You pay for it, you are the product (late-stage enshittification)

How old are you? Because no, there is no key to revoke for a UMD. There is no “banning” discs from a PSP.

The fact you apparently are so young you aren’t aware things used to be different, is proving the point here.

And more importantly, no the license was not the same; the physical disc fell under what is called the First Sale Doctrine:

The first sale doctrine is a legal principle codified in U.S. copyright law at 17 U.S.C. § 109. It states that once a copyright owner sells or gives away a physical copy of a work, their control over the distribution of that specific copy ends.

When companies began to use license keys for instance as a backdoor route to bypass it, it was a big legal deal.

I think you’re confusing copyright ownership, which was always the same (since video games have existed, that is), with end user licenses, the nature of which are very different now.

No, it’s literally not. Sony can take away your license for a digital game for any or no reason. They cannot take away your license for the physical good outside of very specific cases (and they will require a court order to do it, unlike revoking a digital license).

Imagine living somewhere that brings suits against companies for hurting workers, without the workers themselves needing to pay exorbitant fees to bring a class action.

Not in this way. I can literally still play my UMD games on my old PSP, and Sony can’t do shit about it.

“I’ll maybe hurt you a little less, and I’ll keep doing the bad thing” isn’t a compromise; a compromise has to benefit both sides, and not being harmed is just the default expectation, not a benefit.

Here we go boiiiiiis!

This is why I have such a hard time trusting any “only war is the class war” pusher. Pretending that all will be well if we give one group what they want reeks of a desire for power rather than a desire for liberation, and you know that those people are not going to either 1) share any power they gain with people they worked with to get that power, who have a different idea of what the post-revolution society should look like (e.g. the USSR banning other Socialist factions), or 2) actually ensure the society they build does not recreate the same social issues (specifically, the ones that didn’t affect them personally).

WRT the tech backlash, I’ve been pushing myself to have a fully offline-capable tech ecosystem. I’ve been sharing that (though it’s seen only marginal adoption) with my family, who are long-distance, and I’ve been really really happy with how much I find myself actually using it versus using ‘online’ media. I don’t know if that fits into the models of interaction that the movements mentioned in the article are advocating, though, or if they’re going more “use tech less”, rather than “use tech that serves Capital less”.

I’m not telling anyone else to do this; it’s definitely my version of reclaiming time and money and attention from Big Tech, but I guarantee that if you find a way to decouple from a major corporate-run platform you rely on, you will realize just how unenjoyable those platforms are.

Ah, it pulled a Christopher Nolan!

Yes, self-hosting and small-group AI hosting needs to be legal, accessible, and feasible.

Despite the pessimistic (and largely technically incorrect) takes here, the internet is actually an incredible feat of human collaboration; the most distributed, interconnected, democratized, and resilient communication system ever built.

You’d hope that Lemmy users, being people who’ve mostly fled the big social media sites with at very least some marginal technical cost to themselves, wouldn’t be pulling a millennial version of the boomer “AOL == The Internet” thing by treating FAANG’s sites as the internet, but alas.

“organizations need alternatives to proprietary AI systems to gain greater control over their data and infrastructure”

Tears of joy, maybe.

deleted by creator

It’s 0% porn. It’s corporate-approved and ‘safe’ AI slop. Not even something you can fap to in self hatred.

What?