71
The curious case of Epic Games: how the developer beat Google but not Apple
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
71 points (91.8% liked)
Games
16743 readers
731 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I dunno, I think Google has some of that too though
Google is worth over one trillion dollars, genius. And for the record-
There are FIVE publicly traded trillion dollar companies.
Besides, if you want to win a complex court case, it certainly helps to have more than a few million dollars, so you can hire more of the best lawyers and let them prepare for longer time. But at some point, more money gets useless, and the stock value of your company isn't even money that you could spend on anything.
TIL I'm a fucking idiot if I'm not up to date on my trillion dollar companies
What an angry person. I wrote specifically that I hadn't read the article. Not every utterance should be taken so seriously.
You could've corrected me on my out of date information which was absolutely true for a while. I would've been receptive to learning.
In any case, there was zero chance here of any damage done, yet you behave as though I'm spreading harmful medical information or something. Bye.
I’m not an angry person at all. I just think that you shouldn’t opine on articles you had no intention to read, and then make up information so you can argue non-points with people. And “out of date?” That’s a pretty broad defense isn’t it? Sure….. At a certain point there were no trillion dollar companies- until there was one. So it looks like you have the perfect defense there bud.
I won’t apologise becasue It’s my belief that people need to be called out over this bullshit.
We’re far too lax and forgiving of people who purposefully dilute information because they’re too lazy to bother to educate themselves- and then start lengthy arguments in defense of said bullshit.
I’d like to think you’ll remember er this the next time you think to invent “facts” so you can join in a discussion.
Don’t argue. Just do better.
Yeah you kind blew the whole "I'm not angry" charade with the second half of this message.
Edit: after browsing your comment history a moment, it's quite clear I'm not nearly the first to feel the anger