This doesn't seem that different from paying for usenet. It's not like they're making DVDs of pirated movies and selling them on the street corner; they were basically just aggregating content and the service they were providing was making it easily searchable and accessible, not doing the actual pirating, from the sound of it, unless I'm misunderstanding the situation.
KoboldCoterie
joined 1 year ago
We're getting some really mixed signals from you here...
I'd consider one, but it'd have to pay considerably more. Like, 50% or more above what I'd otherwise expect for a fully remote position, and it would have to be an easy commute.
In most cases it's adding 20-30% to the length of the work day when the commute is included, plus costs of transportation itself. Plus the general inconvenience and the fact that it's almost always going to mean a more toxic culture. But if the pay and benefits were absolutely fantastic, I'd consider it, at least short-term.
I wish I could show my country next to my username or something lol.
You could use a vanity username with a flag emoji in it, if you really wanted to.
Kind of hate slide 1. There's no point in specifying 'in billions of USD' if you're only including percentages. The entire pie chart could represent a trillion dollars, or $25, and they wouldn't have to change a single thing about it.
Edit: Ah, I see, you can hover over them to see the values. Useless as a static image and useless on my phone.
I doubt even Microsoft are stupid enough to think they could release a PC-based gaming handheld without Steam support and not fail spectacularly.
Wasn't the original Perfect Dark hard sci-fi with aliens and spaceships and things? It's possible I just don't remember it well. Either way, this doesn't look like a bad game at all. Just not what I'd have expected.
This is the first I've seen of this game, but... this is definitely not what I expected from a game titled 'Perfect Dark'. Maybe I just don't remember the N64 game well enough, but this seems pretty far-removed, from a plot perspective.
That being said, creating a private instance is a relatively difficult hurdle. By providing private communities, an admin can take care of the hosting, along with all of the other communities, while those who want something more controlled and closed can have an easily accessible option.
That's fair, and I'm honestly probably just thinking about worst-case scenarios that won't actually happen. There's plenty of ways malicious actors could already be doing some pretty bad things and they don't seem to be, so it's probably fine.
Eh, we already have private communities.
I did mention further down the comment chain the one use case for this I can think of - communities for info and feedback about the specific instance to / from its members; things like donations, financial disclosures, etc. - that you wouldn't want participation in from anyone not actually using the instance. It has its place; I'm more afraid of seeing popular communities going instance-only for whatever reason, with it being used solely to drive signups on a specific instance.
I mean it's fine on paper. But like... imagine that a popular instance - lemmy.world, let's say - has a community that's very popular and, for whatever motivation, decides they want to push people to move to their instance (or at least create accounts there), so they change one or more of those popular communities to be local-only.
Best case, they fracture the community. Worse case, a very large number of users start making accounts there to use those communities, and abandon other instances. Worst case, they use the large influx of signups they get from such a move to promote themselves, grow even further, and eventually do something malicious.
We can already create private instances that don't federate for those niche communities; I don't really see what this feature is adding other than specifically having communities dedicated to that specific instance (With instance-specific information like donations, financials, outage notices, that sort of thing.)
It's not bear season, and a hunter doesn't have a hunting license. He takes his gun and drives out to bear country, and starts walking around bear dens waiting for a mother bear to attack him, then he shoots her and claims self defense.
Was he justified, or did he intentionally set up a scenario where the bear was likely to feel threatened and attack him, so he'd have an excuse to shoot her?