HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | stale2002's commentslogin

Force them to release it anyway. By law.

Incredible. Let's just upend well established rights to agency because you really like video games.

This is how literally all laws work. By default, you can do whatever you'd like. Some things leave others feeling they've been harmed, cheated, etc. so we pass laws saying you may not do those things.

People were pointing out the issues with DRM 20+ years ago, but it was largely a theoretical concern at the time for most people. Now it's more real in exactly the way people said it would be (oops, your new computer doesn't have a CD drive, and newer windows doesn't allow the old DRM drivers anyway so your old games are unusable. Better buy our new digital version again. Oops we've decided to remove your access to the new digital version. No refunds.) for them, so the idea of passing laws against it is gaining popularity.


Yes, why not? As those rights are set by law, they can be changed by law.

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

Unlike freedom of speech, this right is intended to be limited in scope and duration. So let’s promote that progress! While we’re at it, we can reduce the length of copyright altogether.

Frankly this bill should be extended to cover similar situations in business and consumer software, etc. Abandonware has always been a legally murky area.


I guess it would be any of the very powerful open weight models that anyone can run and finetune/jailbreak.

> Do you have any concrete proof that game decompilation efforts influenced any "mainstream" models?

Yeah tons of games have been decompiled recently. Its a big viral thing now.


> Companies are not going to want to give away their main proprietary advantage that they've invested into.

Companies never want to be regulated. Almost by definition. Thats why we have a government to force them to follow the law.

If IP rights are weakened by this, and its easier for competitors to reuse other people's code/innovations, then that sounds awesome to be, TBH!

> is not going to be viable for a whole swath of online-only game studios

If there is demand from players to play these types of games then someone will make them.

Its only getting easier to make games, after all. I'm not too worried about the dinosaurs losing their edge.


Basically by eliminating IP rights, what you're suggesting is to make games not commercially viable. Do you expect content creators to work for free?

What will happen is the money is invested into other industries and we'll see another video game crash like in the 80's.


Nobody is eliminating all IP rights. This is about games that are shutdown that they aren't making any money off of anyway.

Additionally, IP rights are already way too strict, and with technology we don't need nearly as much investment into it to make games. Productivity is massively improving. Huge R&D simply isn't needed anymore.


Nobody but you mentioned “eliminating” IP rights. Stop being disingenuous

> but it seems like a strange thing to focus on as our democracy and the rule of law

Society is improved one issue at a time, and if you sit around waiting for the revolution to come, you will end up like the socialists who never win any elections and achieve nothing for decades.

No, we do not need to overthrow all of capitalism overnight, or solve "democracy", or whatever it is that you are advocating for, before we take any action to improve society.

That is code for "just don't do anything except LARP and complain, and attack anyone who actually is accomplishing things". Its a useless philosophy.


> That's never going to happen. Game companies are not going to give you their source code.

Sure they will. They can be forced to by the government which is society's monopoly on violence.

> but we have to be realistic.

No we don't. We can just force companies to do it, using the threat of the law.


> usefulness can only be determined after the fact.

Thats great! So in other words it should be perfectly fine for AI to solve all of the supposedly useless math problems so that it might possibly be useful later. No need to worry about the mathematicians hobbies here.


> No need to worry about the mathematicians hobbies here.

of course not.

Hobbies can still be done even if AI gets it done more quickly. Just like today, where knives are made much faster/cheaper in presses and CNC machines, vs a blacksmith hammering. But still, there are hobby blacksmiths.


> One new chemical that can poison the entire earth

See, you said all of these things and then slipped into the sci-stories.

What about, instead of that, grey goo physics defying replicating nano bots aren't real?

People do this thing where they think that if you just linearly increase inteligence that this lets you invent magic overnight, and thats simply not how it works.

The magic takes a lot of time, energy, and resources, if it were even to be possible at all.


Try steel manning the argument - the practice of rebuilding an opposing view into its strongest, most logical form before responding to it.

There is literally concerns over mirror life being developed. The point is that if a system that has high reasoning capacity to solve logistical and mathematical problems, it may be able to come up with a mechanism you, puny-to-it-human, may not be able to predict. It may use technology not yet known to humans (one that it has designed itself), or may use already known technology, but figure out how to scale it up enough to cause earth-wide disaster for humans.


> it may be able to come up with a mechanism you, puny-to-it-human, may not be able to predict.

So the magic then? If this is your argument just say "I think AI will be able to invest magic overnight".


Various poison does exist that can contaminate an area, don't they? Can you really prove that there cannot be some sort of goo that can be produced cheaply that is really really deadly?

But I'm not arguing about goo, I'm saying that we are gambling with each rogue swarm event that there is no thing out there that can kill us that can't be made happen by that swarm.

And btw, we are in many ways already in sci-fi territory.


So, in other words, none of this is about anything related to the actual technology and instead people are talking about the made up, fake technology that you read in Sci-fi book.

Thats the annoying part about these conversations. People try to smuggle in the conclusion of "And now I wave a magic wand that does literally anything, by magic" when discussing stuff that everyone can use and see right now that clearly isn't that.


> So, if we destroy that

Nobody has to destroy anything. If you want to keep using your Apple Approval Stamped stuff, nobody wants to stop you from doing that on your own.

Instead, people are saying that other people should be free to do what they want with their devices that they own. Thats all. Keep your Apple Safe Mode On devices, just stop trying to sabotage other people's attempts to choose otherwise.


Sure, but what people want, and they say it, in the comments above, is access to Apple customers.

That's different from "doing what I want on my own device."


This reminds me of an economist joke.

3 businessmen are in jail, they ask each other what they are there for.

Businessman 1: "I made my prices higher than my competitors and was jailed for price gouging!"

Businessman 2: "I made my prices lower than my competitors and was jailed for price dumping!"

Businessman 3: "I made my prices the same as my competitors and was jailed for price collusion!"


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

Search: