We need two things:

1. much shorter copyright and patent durations, like 14 and 5 years respectively (14 comes from OG copyright duration)
2. stronger enforcement of copyright to protect creators from AI stealing their work

They should happen in that order, and ideally copyright would only be awarded to individuals (or perhaps specifically named lists of individuals, with some reasonable cap), not corporations. The current system is absolutely bonkers.

Eh, I disagree. Slavery being banned is obviously a good thing, but that’s because it’s immoral to own someone else, so it’s essentially just kidnapping. Gambling, on the other hand, shouldn’t be banned for the simple reason that consenting adults should be able to do it if they choose.

Basically, I believe there are two types of rights:

• negative rights - restricts others from preventing individuals from doing things to you (e.g. freedom from slavery, freedom to gamble, etc)
• positive rights - forces others to provide goods or services to you (e.g. free healthcare, right to counsel, etc)

I believe nobody should gamble because it’s a poor financial decision and very addictive (and I choose to avoid gambling), but I also believe you should be allowed to gamble, and the government should ensure that companies that provide gambling services do so fairly (i.e. advertisements about win-rates and whatnot are accurate).

So yes, if gambling wasn’t allowed, people w/ addictions would be better off, but those who aren’t at risk of gambling addiction would be harmed due to restrictions on their freedom. So the question is, do we want government to protect us from ourselves, or merely provide a safety net for when we screw up? I’m absolutely in the latter camp, and I think we should use taxes to fund recovery programs for addictive behaviors in lieu of banning them. In general, I think a tax is way more rights-respecting than a ban.

Eh, not revisionist, just overly simplified. Prohibition massively increased their power and relevance.

Yup, and that’s how the US got the Mafia. We banned alcohol, but people wanted to drink, so the Mafia made that happen.

All a ban does is hurt law abiding citizens and businesses.

Yup, I want “unobtrusive, lightweight, compatible, and secure.” Basically, the best case for an OS is that I don’t notice it.

Yeah, just give me actual temp and wind speed, and I’ll get a feel for what’s cold by going outside.

The article mentions streaming, but anyone know how much of purchases go to the artist? I’m not interested in streaming, but their store looks attractive.

Also, can I redownload the music later? Or is it a one and done deal? Just thinking about backups.

… I’ll stare directly at the sun but never in the mirror

“A lot of the outcry from indie devs was kind of misplaced really. None of them are going to get anywhere near the $1m anyway.”

Then they still don’t understand why people were mad.

The problem was that it was retroactive, and while this specific change may not impact many of the indie devs (I think it does, but that’s irrelevant), the precedent of changing the terms after the fact is unacceptable. That is why people were mad.

But honestly, they shouldn’t have gone this route at all. Their main distinguishing feature that separates them from Unreal Engine (at least in terms of licensing costs) is that they charge per seat instead of royalties per sale. If they’re struggling to fund development, they should increase the cost per seat, and encourage people to update with nifty new features. Throwing in a retroactive royalty-esque charge is a really effective way to piss off your customers.

Yup. I’m a fan of lore in a lot of series, but that’s not why I play Zelda.

I play Zelda because it’s fun. I like the creative puzzles that aren’t super hard, but hard enough to require a little bit of thinking. I like that there’s progression, but no leveling system, so a lot of the progression is learning to use new tools. I like the silly side quests.

I’ve never really been interested in Zelda lore, so I’m honestly okay with things not quite lining up. I guess I see each entry as a separate universe where Link saves Zelda in a different way each time. Zelda games rarely have direct sequels, and I think that was the real mistake this time around. Just let me fight Ganon or whatever in a new cycle every time, I don’t need any kind of story coherency.