HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | piyuv's commentslogin

“All games are essentially rentals” applies the least to Switch 2 among consoles.

Among all gaming platforms, it’s only behind DRM free storefronts like itch.io and GOG.

Unlike PS5 or XBOX, not all switch 2 games require downloads or day 1 patches.


Seriously. The Wii, Wii U, DS, and 3DS eShops are still running to redownload your past purchases. The Wii shop is actually 20 years old now! It feels disingenuous to read people bemoan Nintendo for their "license vs ownership" when Nintendo has an extensive history of supporting its online shop customers.

But locking their cards to the hardware preventing a resale market is pretty crumby. I only purchase Switch2 games that are physical, no download codes. Vote with your dollars.

> locking their cards to the hardware

Are you talking about game keycards? Those don't lock to the hardware, you can resell them or lend them to others with no issue


If you can’t win, get your politicians to ban the competition

Yep, also a time-tested strategy.

As far as I’m aware, only China does this currently.

What Chinese AI lab are you aware of that the CCP closed down?

China blocks ChatGPT. Which is “banning the competition” that the above posters were claiming the US would do.

What do you mean “it would have been marked as hatred”? It _is_ hatred, bigotry, racism, etc. Trump isn’t shy about showing how racist and hateful he is.

There were clusters using PS2 and PS3 systems. Clusters using old Android phones wouldn’t be novel


The key part is “but for work I don’t really care”


No! the key part is "they dont't care why should I" ?


I don’t blame them tbh.

“A fool and his money are soon parted”


Some seem to expect governments to save them, which worked in 2008.


Wasn't that the casino who were rescued.. anyway they were selling "bets" which they claimed were "safe'.

If 100 people play a parlor game which the ratings agency has given"80% chance of winning", and 70% lose money instead...


There are inconveniences, but some protection is better than no protection. Trying to protect your privacy online is not a zero-sum game.


Google also makes money by making search worse.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/


[flagged]

I often hate how loaded/incendiary Ed Zitron's tone is and don't like some of his takes, but I wouldn't call it "some random blog". I run a random blog, that guy's closer to being a proper journalist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Zitron


Referencing a blog is fine. But when you're on a forum discussing ideas just forwarding a blog link is bad taste. Summarize the key arguments. Do some work.

It's like if someone is arguing free markets and I just provide a link to a WSJ editorial. It's rude, requires no work on the sender and imposes work on the receiver to read and synthesize and respond to the argument. I see this occasionally where someone will just have an LLM generate a response (which it will happily do for any topic taking any position) and just passing it off.


> Summarize the key arguments. Do some work.

I'd still take at least a blog post with relevant information over nothing, but yeah, that is fair.


The definition of “viable” matters


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: