I’m not directing this at you personally when I say this, but what the fuck is so hard for most people to believe about the idea? Is it a foreign concept to treat franchized fast food places run by different franchisees as not equal? I’m not the only one who uses reviews to decide if I should skip a crappy location.

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/15308270

https://lemmy.world/comment/13889867

And you do not speak for anybody other than yourself.

And yeah, insurance companies spend billions lobbying government, and that’s why running for office yourself is valuable, you can refuse to accept these donations. You need to find your own powerful group to get you elected (maybe labor unions?), because that’s how the game is played, but there are options if you’re laser focused on one type of policy.

I agree with the sentiment, but all the labor unions in the country couldn’t hold a candle to the potential damage a billionaire could do to an independent campaign, let alone a cabal of them. They don’t play fairly in politics, and they’re not above using advertising and media to direct a narrative that benefits their interests.

That’s not to say I’m endorsing violence. After seeing Bezos and Musk manipulate news media and social media, respectively, I just don’t have much hope in the system anymore.

The food and ingredients are the same, but the quality can vary a lot depending on how bad of job they do cooking it. When you’ve been disappointed enough by buying dry and borderline-burned breakfast, you stop trusting that all locations are equal.

If I’m stopping by somewhere out of town, yes. Food quality varies by location, and I’m not going to waste my money on an undercooked meal at McDonald’s when the competitor down the street is better.

The corporation? Definitely not. But review bombing and boycotting will hurt the profits of that franchised location, and its owner certainly will.

To be charitable, other people can have different views on ethics.

For example, if harming a CEO who helped raise claim denial rates from less than 10% to 30% results in revised policies and less overall suffering, that could be morally justifable to some.

With the review bombing and public hatred of that McDonald’s location? Fired is more like it.

They united the people against them. That’s living up to half the name, I guess.

The ironic part is that it’s not bad as an index. Ignore the garbage generative output and go straight to cited sources and somehow get more useful links than an actual search engine.

Sounds like regular college/university politics to me.

A slightly more accurate translation:

Oh, you actually noticed. We are currently waiting for our pack of lawyers to prepare the paperwork to file a suit against GamersNexus for what we are going to claim is libel. Rest assured, we are committed to trying to find some escape goat to throw under the bus and minimizing the damage to our investors.

The in-place upgrade process leaves a lot to be desired, in my experience. I understand why routers with limited storage capacity wouldn’t be able to support it, but the lack of A-B partitioning support for x86 and ARM builds in 2024 is really stupid.

If an upgrade introduces a regression and breaks, my family is stuck without internet while I spend a few hours re-flashing an old release and making sure everything still works.

Wireguard uses UDP, by the way.

https://www.wireguard.com/protocol/

I think we both agree on that part. Don’t get me wrong here, I 100% am against Nintendo on this one. They aren’t entitled to anything, nor can I think of any good reason why one company should ever be allowed to compel another to provide details on their customers/users.

I have zero faith in Reddit on doing the right thing, though. If Nintendo asked nicely and Steve Huffingpaintman thought it would be more financially beneficial to play ball, I expect they would hand it over gift-wrapped with a pretty bow on top.

That clarifies things a bit, but I don’t quite agree with the premise that it’s “not actionable unless they can directly connect you to actual evidence of actual distribution.”

Copyright infringement sits in the interesting intersection where it can be persued both criminally and civilly. I agree with your premise in where it applies to criminal cases, but the bar for civil cases (lawsuits) is a lot lower at preponderance of the evidence.

If Infringement Igor dumps and seeds ROMs and BIOS images and talks about the new dumps he’s uploading for fellow redditors and didn’t take any precautions to mask his identity, he is more likely than not fucked if Reddit hands over his information. Courts have decided an IP address is by itself insufficient as proof that the account holder is the one committing the infrigement, but Nintendo having a matching email and phone number to support their claim is going to make it a lot harder for Igor to convince the judge that he didn’t do it.

As per my previous comment:

Nowhere in my comment did I claim that Nintendo is entitled to any of the requested information.

And yes, you’re correct: they could download every game ever created without paying for it and shout from the rooftops about doing so, and nobody would have a valid claim against them because that’s not copyright infringement.

I’m specifically talking about the brilliant geniuses who, in no uncertain terms, state that they have or intend to personally upload, share, or otherwise redistribute in any form, ROMs and other copyrighted works. Only the government has the right to demand Reddit hands over personal information of its users, but if Nintendo asks and Reddit hands it over, I’m not going to feel bad for the subset of them that were stupid enough to paint a giant target on their own backs.

And that was the entire point of my original comment. Not “Nintendo gud”, not “pirates bad”, and certainly not “Nintendo has an involiable legal right to know the PII of pseudonymous users on another platform”. Simply, “play stupid games while expecting Reddit to protect you from the consequences, win stupid prizes.”

Talking is irrelevant. It’s debatable whether they’re actually entitled to even compel the sub to be closed, as they didn’t allow links to anything infringing, and discussion is protected. I just ignored that because I don’t care.

There’s a distinction between talking about piracy and admitting to committing copyright infringement on a public forum: the former is discussion, and the latter is self-incrimination. It’s not going to actually matter unless that person makes themselves worthwhile to go after, but that doesn’t make it any less stupid of an idea to admit to it in the first place.

Trying to demand the personal information of participants in discussions without direct, explicit proof that that account actually distributed pirated content makes them bad people. It is not excusable behavior.

I’m not sure where you got the idea that I’m excusing Nintendo’s overreaching demands from. Nowhere in my comment did I claim that Nintendo is entitled to any of the requested information.

Nintendo is definitely overstepping with that request, but I can’t say I feel bad for the subset of Redditors shitting their pants because they admitted to distributing* ROMs. Trusting a corporation to protect you from the consequences of your actions is a level of stupidity beyond deserving sympathy.

*Specifically distributing. Not downloading. Not discussing. Distributing.

I do enjoy some crusty C developers arguing with rusty not-C developers every once in a while.