• 1 Post
  • 16 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 12th, 2023

help-circle
rss
  • whining about only apply to them, not small startups

    No, to the point blue sky, not exactly big tech, is struggling to comply, after being called out.

    They said they will, it’s not even bad faith.

    Contrary to common beliefs, regulations strongly favour big companies, because they have the resources to keep up with burocracy, while gatekeeping smaller companies

    The problem isn’t VC money either, because American and global funds invest in European companies too, there aren’t just as many eligible ones.

    Most successful start up in Europe still decide to get listen on american exchanges (see the recent klarna case) This is purely because of favorable environment lol

    Fuck them, if they have to stay, follow our laws

    I mean, I really don’t care, but that’s exactly how european economy remained, keep doing the same thing expecting a different outcome doesn’t seem smart

    And no, Volkswagen is the 10th company in the world by revenues, it’s not dumping, European manufacturers simply can’t keep the pace. The most sold EV in Europe right now is Tesla lol


  • The assumption is excessive regulation is one of the reason we don’t have a domestic tech industry

    While I don’t think it’s necessary the main factor, for sure it’s partially true

    If Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech are cautious and struggling to bring features in Europe while being compliance, I can’t imagine how an european start up could trive as their starting market here

    You can’t really deregulate domestic companies only












  • There’s only so much entertainment you can get out of one before you’ve seen everything, get bored, and look for another one.

    You’re absolutely right, but that’s true from “your perspective”. For you the fame might last 50 hours and that’s all, but the developers still need to work on big patches, content and fixes even years after release.

    If a studio fails to budget for that and make sure those costs are included in the price of the game, it frankly deserves to go bust

    And this introduces another topic I think. Would the average consumer willing to spend more for a game with everything in it? AAA already cost 70$ at launch, would the average consumer accept further price increases, or would selling plummet in comparison with reduced price+dlc or free to play with microtransanction?

    At the end companies are not inherently “evil” they just look for what works and what doesn’t by trial and error


  • but authors and filmmakers still make TONS of money.

    This is an affirmation many writers would find offensive lol

    The editorial sector is in deep crisis, it’s really hard to live off as a writer unless you’re ridiculously famous.

    Same thing for the filmmaking industry, look at protest of screenwriters and actors, and to companies terrible financial sheets, and to movie theaters basically bankrupting as maybe their time is over. Also we both agree there’s been a shift from movies to tv series and one of the reason is that you “buy the product piece by piece”?

    Ps: funnily enough, period publication of chapters were a thing until not long ago, and still are in somewhere (for example manga in Japan)


  • The big difference with physical goods is that it’s much harder to steal a McDonald’s burger that it is to crack a single player, offline game. Furthermore, once you ate your burger, if you want more, you have to buy another because it’s a consumables.

    On the other hand games are prone to piracy, expecially on pc, you pay once but can play anytime while patched and updates require prolonged work after you purchase.

    It isn’t strange that developers look at dlc, microtransanction or game as a service with subscription, because they allow a stable flow of income that can support development, and it’s harder to avoid paying when the game is always online and stuff like that.



  • You’re absolutely right, but this is a different case I think: It’s freerider problem, people WANT to use internet services, want to use social and so on, the problem is, if possible, they don’t want to pay for it. In the scenario where we make ads completely illegal, companies will look for other ways to monetize the service, because a system which is not in break even on the long term is cursed to bankruptcy.

    People want to watch Netflix, but without paying, that means that if everyone do like that, Netflix will find other ways of monetization. That’s why games became full of microtransanction and always online stuff, for example. That’s what made ads popular in the first place, don’t want to pay? No problem, here’s a free sites with ads. should socials be closed community where you can access only paying, like pay tv? Because even right now removing ads on Reddit or YouTube paying is possible.

    Even Lemmy growth at a certain point will incur in this, because a platform can’t hold itself on 2 unpaid developers and free labor of volunteers who pay for server costs too.

    Would we better off without these sites if we’re not willing to pay for them? Maybe yes. But what certain is that without financial stability a project can’t go far. The problem is both of the producer of the producer, sure, but also its users should wonder how much they want the platform, because it will evolve accordingly.