[-] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

If you are going to worry about archival then when reencode it at all? Just remux the content from the dvd into a suitable container and be done with it.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

The whole idea of copyright is a granting a state backed monopoly which is the antithesis of a free market as I understand it.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Rocky now is what Centos used to be, a downstream rebuild of Redhat Enterprise. Cento Stream is now a rolling release and is pretty much RHEL unstable.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

If you want to accomplish a noble cause like preservation I don't think it's disingenuous to also satisfy some personal desires along the way. Easier to get people on board to do it if you do.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

You are right my argument was predicated on the price rise being justified by piracy not the cause of it. If they don't like ESPNs pricing model can't they license their content elsewhere?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Better by which objective metric? Amount of content? Total size of game code and data? Got to disagree with you otherwise.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah, that isn't how economics work, they increased the price because they believe it will be a more profitable price point. I guess they could argue they lost the price sensitive customers to piracy and are just giving up on that segment and focusing on the people who just pay whatever?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Tell that to console manufacturers. Or Apple for that matter.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

None of those things are true. Paying money is in no way guaranteeing the current developers will wake up wanting to maintain it tomorrow, nor am I purchasing access to an update service. It isn't a purchase of anything and shouldn't be framed as one. It's a Contribution or a donation that gives nothing in return and saying it's something else is dishonest.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Except it's misleading as you aren't really buying it, you are buying a supporters badge key as I understand it. Might as well be selling an immich NFT. I still don't think this is being upfront and it's still a dark pattern it's just slightly less misleading than the blatantly false buy a license wording.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

The wording is still misleading because you aren't purchasing immich and if you were, what exactly would you be purchasing? Control of the project? The immich name? You aren't purchasing a license to use it as you already have that. A supporters badge key? Okay well be upfront that that is what you are selling because you aren't selling immich itself.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

He's being a dick and suggesting you fix this in immich rather than provide this stop gap workaround. I for one appreciate your diligence in pointing this out as I'd seen no mention of it prior to your first post.

view more: next ›

Mondez

joined 1 month ago