Either way, just remember to support artists when you can. Bandcamp Friday is one of the best ways I know of to fund artists in exchange for FLACs that you can legally listen to however you want to.
But I was a broke student in the heydays of torrenting, so I’m not judging using any means necessary to listen to music.
deleted by creator
Is it better or worse than letting the game have absolute root access? Because that’ll no doubt be what Denuvo goes with next…
Subscriptions for everything. Especially hardware.
I already hate my always-online, have to use their shit app robot vacuum that gets worse after each update. I can’t imagine buying a new, overpriced car these days and having it do all the same shit.
Regan really did a number on the US. Broad privatization of public services, with all the wrong incentives in place. Which was then a vicious cycle of people hating their experience with public services -> politicians cut their funding -> service gets worse -> people hate their experience -> repeat until all your taxes have been siphoned to private entities and your govt is in shambles.
Tell me you stopped reading my comment mid-sentence without telling me.
Idk if you’ve played the game, but you regularly have to deal with pretty harsh realities of those times.
OP isn’t wrong, though. RDR2 does a good job of putting you in the shoes of someone 125y ago (as much as a real time simulation projected on a 2D surface can), after all, someone 125y ago wasn’t thinking “man, these times sure have some harsh realities”, it was just the world they knew.
While I don’t think the writers intended the takeaway to be “look how much better life was in the wild west”, they did intend to give some perspective on what “freedom” meant to people in the US 125y ago. And how something things have changed while others have stayed exactly the same.
Yes, this was the main theme of the game. To Arthur and the rest of their camp, they are the embodiment of the American dream: living off the land, doing whatever they want, working hard to succeed, living a simple life. They see “civilization” and the justice system that comes with it as a false promise, taking freedoms away to somehow guarantee more freedom. And they see the industrial revolution as creating the largest gangs of them all, but calling them “corporations”. So big that they can pay pinkertons to bully workers, while also paying the law to look the other way.
RDR2 really is a work of art. It’s not 100% historically accurate, it’s “the lie that makes us see the truth”.
The most fun part of this isn’t whether it was the first to do this, but perhaps the worst take that any games journalist has ever had in history:
The game’s control setup is its most terrifying element. The left analog stick moves you forward, back, and strafes right and left, while the right analog stick turns you and can be used to look up and down.
Of all the unprecendented things happening these days, this is not one of them. This is standard issue, 100y-old Red Scare garbage. Liberalism scares tyrants, so they always try this strat, and it’s always bound to lose.
I admit I am misusing the term “cartel” here, given that it refers to a group of independent interests acting cooperatively, not a single entity. And legally recognized corporations already attempt to form cartels whenever possible, which is the entire purpose of anti-trust law.
And I agree that govt legislations each have their own definitions for what constitutes a “corporation”, but it’s the same for “marriage”. Yet we wouldn’t say marriage only exists if you have a govt.
I don’t think it’s useful or interesting to end the discussion at “a govt defines a corporation, therefore a corporation doesn’t exist without a govt”. Because I maintain that if the US govt disappeared, all the entities you currently consider “US-based corporations” would not disappear. Similarly, corporations currently operate internationally in many different countries with many different legislative requirements and many different definitions of “corporation”. Yet we don’t think of them as existing exclusively in the context of any one of those countries.
A corporation can never do that - government laws set out very clearly who controls what
Corporations do have infighting, and Hostile Takeovers do happen, and we are in agreement that ONLY reason they’re not bloodier is because of governments enforcing their laws. But also, I shouldn’t have made “cartel” analagous to “corporation”, since the analogy for a cartel civil war would be multiple businesses or corporations having a falling out.
But we also already have a sordid history of US “corporations” operating outside the laws of other countries, oftentimes with the help of the US military. So how do we square that circle?
But you understand that everything you linked are examples of why a govt can’t actually print infinitely and can’t just pay interest to rich people…right?
Also it’s a red flag to me that all of your sources are youtube videos.
The purpose of government securities is not to fund spending but to give the rich a safe place to park their capital with interest.
You have a source on this? I find it difficult to believe that it is ever a good idea to just take out a loan for the sake of making the interest payments. Especially using public funds, that sounds pretty close to embezzlement.
Rather, a country’s budget should always make use of debt, because its reputation has value and should be invested, not left sitting on the table.
There’s no formal structure, shares or board meetings
This is an arbitrary list of things and I don’t agree that all corporations have all of these, but I guarantee most cartels have a formal structure, a clear description of ownership, and what qualifies as board of leaders. Most wouldn’t be able to function without it.
sometimes they do just descend into civil war
They compete with rival cartels in all the same ways corporations would if they could (or already do when they can get away with it).
They’re businesses
I’m curious why you’re willing to call them businesses but not corporations.
Corporations try to all the time. It’s only through an effective use of law that they don’t. And lately, it hasn’t been very effective.
But also a government can’t print “unlimited currency”. Eventually it would be worthless. They are effectively only permitted to print currency proportional to what their creditors allow.
Drug cartels do all the things any corporation would happily do without laws to restrict them. So I don’t see any distinction and I don’t believe a govt is necessary for a corporation to exist. Just like with any other crime by any other citizen, a govt uses its monopoly on violence to prevent corporations from doing harm.
On the one hand, murder is bad, but on the other hand I am full of hate and fear…
Lol I don’t know what you want man, i didn’t realize this was one of those “digging my heels in because I don’t know how to be wrong” threads. I’ll let you do your thing, peace.
Who is “we”? I’m responding to your top level comment. You just asked the creator of an exclusively client-side app whether they support encryption. Not only is it reasonable for me to assume you mean client side encryption, it’s unreasonable for you to ask for server side encryption, because there is no server. It’s a BYOBackend situation.
Now if you’re asking for client-side encryption, something like Keepass where the file itself is encrypted, you have to use some form of auth to decrypt it on use, and you can store this file using whatever backend you want, that’s perfectly reasonable. I would still consider that encrypted at rest, but at least you could maybe separate encrypted reads from writes and limit the attack surface in the event of a breach.
These same commenters will make fun of reddit and twitter for always being cynical and rage fueled.