• ampersandrew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Wasn’t the original usage talking about economies of scale potentially eliminating the need for things like owning a car, because things like Uber would be more efficient and cost effective?

        • WolfdadCigarette@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Yes, from the WEF in particular. It’s such an inane idea that it drips with sarcasm even when sincere. They described a utility without any of the makings of a utility. I wish it hadn’t been adopted by right wingers and turned into a catchphrase.

          • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s also been adopted by left wingers into some kind of threat, when it wasn’t meant to serve that purpose either.

              • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                The kind of person who’s disillusioned with capitalism. Take that to mean whatever you like, but they’ll still use that quote in the wrong context.

        • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yup, but of course everyone got greedy. Last time I used Uber I spent 70 dollars to go 4 miles. I learned my bus map immediately after that

          • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It was just an example, not a template, and it was more of an idealist projection of some better future based on where we were heading. You’re right that public transit is a far older invention that handles the job better in this case.

            • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              oh agreed. You just made me chuckle because I remember the tech bros saying all of that back then, and how naiive I was for believing it.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    7 months ago

    well dont make them so dependent of servers, and make sure we can self host.

    • Specal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      They could even sell the server for a final income if they’re greedy enough

        • Specal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Honestly if it came with documentation I’d be willing to pay for the game server software

          • umbrella@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            remember when they used to do that for free?

            (yes grandma, lets get you back to bed)

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah that’s literally all they need to do; release the hosting software at EOL, plus a patch that does custom ‘which server am I connecting to’ config.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Publishers don’t deserve copyright protection unless the Library of Congress gets a copy.

    (I’m not arguing that should be a sufficient requirement, only a necessary one.)

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Neither is the UK one, it’s “under review”.

      Frankly that seems like an intentional thing they’ve done to try and kill petitions, which often get most of their buzz in the initial weeks.

  • Ghostface@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    As hardware and specs get cheater couldn’t/shouldn’t that hosts hardware?

    Charge a small fee to publishers to cover hosting

    • Specal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes but no, companies don’t buy servers anymore typical, they use services like AWS for scalability which charge an absolute fortune.

      • Ghostface@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You are correct with a service like aws, But of your talking needs for a project like Linode, digital ocean could fit, as this would only need For older titles compute and storage.

        Can’t charge for service because that would lead to DMCA suits.

        There are enough foss our there where except for the server cost would be minimal to maintain