Just your normal everyday casual software dev. Nothing to see here.
I’m using keepassXC with syncthing as my sync service, with my server as an encrypted longterm storage. It’s pretty flawless, just make sure that you keep file versioning on(its a setting in syncthing) for at least 2 versions, I haven’t had it happen yet but, with any dual system setup there might be a sync conflict if it fails to sync before being modified.
gamepass ultimate isn’t worth the value for me. realistically there is only maybe 3 games a year I really must have wanted to play, and most of them I know will go on sale later on down the road. Paying 240$ a year for a program that I only really am going to play maybe a handful of must play games on isn’t worth it.
The issue isn’t the selection of games on the platform, they have a ton. It is just cost wise, why pay 240$ a year for it, and get a handful of games I can only play while they sub is active, when most games I play are in the 20-40$ range anyway and if I just buy them it’s a once off can play forever purchase. I can’t even give them the argument of convenience, because it’s equal to 4 AAA titles yearly, that you need to keep paying for in order to continue to use.
I don’t care about a second layer of security on most of my things, like Lemmy for example, I really don’t care if it’s secure. My blizzard launcher, I really don’t care. my discord? ok maybe a little
Being said due to this, I have both my TOTP and my Passwords in the same program. It still requires a second password to access, but it removes a little of the security. My vault is encrypted by a private key plus a password, and any type of off-system storage is encrypted an additional level past that, if someone gains access to that vault, I have far worse issues at hand then someone managing to steal my accounts.
As someone who was late to the FFXIV train, I just started a few months ago so I started while the unlimited free trial system was already established. But I have many friends who do pay for a sub.
I think their decision to open the game to be an unlimited free trial was a smart move, however their decision to make it a one and done trial was not. I 100% would be ok with paying for multiple months of subscription in order to get the features that the sub provides as a player, but like I know that if I ever chose to do so, I will never be allowed to /not/ pay. This means that me as a player will likely never spend a dime on the game, because I don’t want to be introduced into that sunk cost.
If they were planning to go F2P they should have full sent F2P, the hybrid route of “Yea you can play as long as you want, but as soon as you give us money you will be required to give us money forever to play” route is counter productive and is likely costing them quite a bit of money itself.
How does this reflect on the monthly sub cost? Well it’s simple, removing the requirement of a sub to play on it’s existing userbase, while at first will be a money hit because the non-team players that are trapped with their predatory monetization scheme will leave, but a good majority of their player-base would keep their sub, because FF XIV is very much a team social based game, and the restrictions given for F2P are not viable in later on dungeons as the usage of the marketplace system and the free company system is moreorless a must have in order to play.
Players will swap to a stop the sub when they don’t want to play team wise, and renew it when they need socials again, but since the sub is now “optional” there won’t be as much of a need to make the sub feel worth the money. Which is their biggest problem right now with other competitors releasing highly successful expansion packs under a fully subbed model.
In my opinion the new update that they did which added new game modes was nice Devil’s mode on both are as fun as hell, but it was really a step backwards for people who play with their friends to make it so it’s not possible to see the cards that other people have when dead. It ruined the entire enjoyment of being dead for the game, I can understand why they did it for public lobby but a private lobby shouldn’t have had that restriction it just ruins the enjoyment and the content of people being dead.
A good portion of being dead when playing with friends was monitoring how they played their hand that way next round you could potentially use that but the person would know that you use that so they would know to throw up how they did it, now you can more or less run the same strategy for eight nine turns in a row no one’s going to know how you did it and then change it up it’s boring.
I would actually much rather have an elevator that set up like that, it’s super clear where the ground floor is, and it still has the star to bring your attention to it. Plus it is expandable by reprioritizing the open and closed door buttons to be if you had a basement one or basement two (or a service level) and then you could just move the buttons down a little
You know after the whole fixed the labels of the buttons issue is fixed.
I’m a firm believer that if a developer or company decides to brick your software/purchase even years down the road, they should be required to re-imburse you the price paid. It doesn’t even need to include full game closures, but like shit like this where you buy an item, then they update it which makes it so you no longer can use it should require it.
I imagine the insane price to entry is a big thing.
I had some disposable cash so I went with the index, I love it don’t get me wrong but, 1k is super fucking steep for an enjoyable system, and that’s ontop of the requirement they do it right when they make a game, many of them take vr as a minority and you can tell when a game puts it on the side burner
Being as it’s GOG that’s saying that, I don’t agree with that statement, if it was any other company out there I would fully agree with it, but that statement goes against the core values of what they’ve built gog of from the point of creation.
They know that if they did try to push something like that without a court order that no studio is going to want to release, because let’s be real they’re already struggling finding Studios to want to release on them without any form of DRM,
About time they publicly released that on death we’re going to transfer every license over to another person by request without a requirement to go through the game studios itself, almost every Studio on their platform is going to withdraw their licensing to Gog to distribute the game, because that is less money in the company’s hand because they want each generation to buy their games, because less people buying the games means less money in their pocket.
With this method they can state “hey we’re following the legal system we have a court order saying to hand over the keys, our hands are tied” which from a business point of view is a lot more understandable then “We are going to allow giving away your game to free on death to the next person in line”
It’s legal speech for “we want to however if we straight out say we’re going to do it no studio is going to want to release games on our platform”
The music being removed from your account shit shouldn’t be legal. You paid for it they should be refunding you if they are removing access, in a perfect world anyway.
Assuming the US when I say this but, some year we’ll have consumer protections, I’ll likely be dead by then but hopefully the day will come to light.
That being said I have never heard of soul seek, it sounds like a limewire spinoff? I agree music industry has /sucked/ in terms of obtaining stuff
I don’t like videos either tbh, but I would be ok with posts that are properly identified, so like [video] [news] [opinion] etc lol
This should be correct yes, as long as you don’t include code that was added after the license change you should be in Clearwater.
Technically speaking I don’t think it’s allowed for him to have changed the license to a more restrictive license in the first place because he didn’t rewrite the entire project when he did so which means it’s still containing code that under the license terms are supposed to be open indefinitely, but if you want to avoid all that drama you can just play it safe and Fork the version prior to him editing the license
Personally speaking now this isn’t going to stop the people that he’s trying to avoid that hassle with, because I don’t think he has legal ground because I don’t think the license change was within the allowed terms of his license in the first place
Sending as a second comment cuz I just now read your source, but it’s different than what my original comment was.
I didn’t realize the density that GPL code puts into your project, it does seem upon looking into it that that is correct that he cannot under GPL terms redistribute that software under the license that he’s chosen. He is violating the GPL by doing so, because even with permission of the contributors, GPL code cannot be converted over to a lesser freedom code without a full rewrite, because code that was generated while under the GPL can’t be locked down at a future date via a license that that is stricter than the existing one. The only thing you can do is make it less restrictive than GPL.
That being said, the only people who can report violations of code that is not following the GPL, are going to be copyright holders so if everyone was indeed okay with it there’s no one who would be able to pursue the violation anyway
My main concern is that he states that he has permission from every contributor so he isn’t misusing it, then immediately locks the repository to only people who had contributed before.
I understand it’s probably just a tactic to lower the amount of useless information from people wanting to comment from posts like this, but it doesn’t look good from a point of view of declaring Victory and then retreating immediately.
fully agree, the maintainer pulled a “It’s my toy and I’m taking it elsewhere” which is never healthy for a project like that. Instead of embracing the fact people were active in the project he only focused on the fact that there was some malicious parties that were violating GPL, so his solution was to kill most external support of the project. It won’t survive that
according to the maintainer he got permission from everyone, and those who didn’t give the permission for he rewrote the code for. Least that’s how it seems to be here
Regardless as the maintainer of that GitHub clarified in a closed pull request, it’s not actually allowed on Github to have a license that blocks the ability to do forks and modify the programs yourself, I never knew this but it says it on the page he linked.
basically it seems if you post a project as public on Github, you implicitly grant a license to fork and use the code regardless of what it’s terms say since you need to follow those terms for the Github platform usage. The section 6 I’m not sure about though, cause the terminology confuses me, I can’t tell if it means that it can be supercedes or that it supercedes a private license
it seems his intent isn’t to dissuade people contributing, he’s just been burned a few times with GPL violations so he’s changing the terms to prevent that
I might be able to read this on light mode but, on dark mode + that layout it’s hard
not as bad as the 1 word speed reader but still it’s almost impossible to focus on. I’m impressed to uare able to
Oh man I fucking called this one, as soon as I read that article a few days ago saying that the Russian maintainers were removed from the kernel, I’m like man if Russia was smart right now they would do a country-funded version, this is completely legal as well under the licensing of the current kernel.