Quoting: Caldathras

Quoting: PublicNuisance

Quoting: Caldathras

QuoteIt's worth noting at this point that Take-Two's CEO, Strauss Zelnick, was paid $42.1 million last year, which is more than two-and-a-half times the previous year. So once again, the people at the top are pulling in big numbers while cutting the people doing the work.

This needs to be pointed out more often. No one deserves this high a salary, especially at the expense of those that earn much less. Plain greed.

What's the correct number for them to make ? How do you arrive at that number ? Who gets to decide ? I'm not trying to defend Take Two but at the same time trying to dictate how much people are allowed to make is a recipe for a different form of tyranny.

Well, in the end that would be the commoners (i.e., the working class) - much to the terror of the elite classes. Does the French Revolution or Russia's February Revolution ring a bell?

As to your other thoughts, I defer to the answers from others.

I am part of the working class. I work six day weeks, 48 hours a week, to just get by. That means I get to decide ? So I could say that there should be no ceiling for earnings and torpedo your whole plan ? Can I also decide how much you get to earn ? You may not like my thoughts on that number right now.

You failed to answer me how much this man should earn or how you arrived at the number. There is no right number and that's why. The whole argument is just to hate the "rich". You say that this is for the terror of the elites but it should terrify anyone at allowing anybody to make law how much another person can earn. It would never end at the "elites" and would end up affecting the very people you claim to want to help anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This would have been a deal breaker for me but the game already lost any interest of mine with

"Incorporates 3rd-party DRM: nProtect GameGuard"

Multiple reasons to spend my money elsewhere.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Added the Linux version to the community wishlist at GOG and added a forum post asking about plans to bring it to GOG:


https://www.gog.com/forum/saviorless/linux_version

https://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/saviorless_linux_version

View this comment - View article - View full comments

"Incorporates 3rd-party DRM: Denuvo Anti-tamper"

While i'm glad it has a native Linux version this will be a pass for me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Caldathras

QuoteIt's worth noting at this point that Take-Two's CEO, Strauss Zelnick, was paid $42.1 million last year, which is more than two-and-a-half times the previous year. So once again, the people at the top are pulling in big numbers while cutting the people doing the work.

This needs to be pointed out more often. No one deserves this high a salary, especially at the expense of those that earn much less. Plain greed.

What's the correct number for them to make ? How do you arrive at that number ? Who gets to decide ? I'm not trying to defend Take Two but at the same time trying to dictate how much people are allowed to make is a recipe for a different form of tyranny.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Had some Xorg updates come through on my Manjaro machine earlier tonight.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Good feature.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: PublicNuisanceLet's apply some logic. You get caught not paying your ticket. They ask you to but you refuse. They call the police. The police tell you to but you refuse. The police issue you a ticket or straight out arrest you and you refuse to comply. They go to take you by force and you resist. They end up killing you in the struggle.

You think that is bogus because you yourself follow the law and comply with law enforcement but not everybody does.

Not everyone complies with law enforcement, but people not complying with law enforcement really rarely results in anyone dying, especially when it comes to white collar offences, and especially especially civil ones. Even criminal ones--how often have the cops ever killed anyone over embezzlement? Most laws don't result in stereotypical interactions with cops in your car or whatever. And of course, in nearly all developed countries other than the US and to a much lesser extent Canada, the police don't kill people.

But sure, if all the worst possible chances add together, a death could result. So you're saying that if something goes fantastically wrong, any given law could kill someone, therefore you have to never pass a law unless you're willing to imagine it carries the death penalty. No, that's silly. Sure, it's possible, but all kinds of actions could result in death. Saying "As soon as you make a law you have to be willing to have have people killed to enforce it" is roughly equivalent to saying "As soon as you upload a 3d printer design you have to be willing to have people killed to manufacture the plastic it uses." After all, there are factory fatalities, not to mention people working in chemical plants that make the plastics have higher cancer rates. If people start using that design, the additional manufactured plastic could cause death, which by your logic means you have to assume it's going to.

The 3D printer argument isn't really the same thing. I'm talking about having government introducing a law that will bring people into contact with law enforcement. What is more likely to bring you into contact with law enforcement: making a law that people will be expected to abide by or uploading a document that they are not ? The easy way to avoid this line of thought is to not have the knee jerk reaction of making more laws and trying to force your views down other people's throats. We need less laws not more, especially when it concerns soemthing as trivial as whether people use FOSS software or not. Let's not forget it is that which prompted this debate, someone trying to control what software other people use. The hilarity of that is that many if not all people on this site use hardware that is not FOSS and play closed source games with it. If you try to allow the government to control what software you use don't be surprised one day when they use that precedent to try to force you to use Windows. But go ahead and proceed to try to lock people up for using Github or something else like it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: PublicNuisanceAs soon as you make a law you have to be willing to have have people killed to enforce it. If you aren't then you can't have the law.

You're an American, aren't you? Just a wild guess.

Canadian.

Quoting: benstor214

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: PublicNuisanceAs soon as you make a law you have to be willing to have have people killed to enforce it. If you aren't then you can't have the law.

You're an American, aren't you? Just a wild guess.

Last week, I stationed my car at a parking spot without paying for a parking ticket. I was therefore shot by a cop five minutes later.
Advisory: Pay for your parking tickets!

Let's apply some logic. You get caught not paying your ticket. They ask you to but you refuse. They call the police. The police tell you to but you refuse. The police issue you a ticket or straight out arrest you and you refuse to comply. They go to take you by force and you resist. They end up killing you in the struggle.

You think that is bogus because you yourself follow the law and comply with law enforcement but not everybody does. When they don't that leads to violence and can end in death. As soon as you have any law at all you involve law enforcement and you have to be willing to accept that some people have the potential to die in the law being enforced. This goes for any law no matter how big or small. It doesn't mean we can't have laws but it does require to have adult conversations and accept that some people are not going to act rationally or peacefully.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

From store page:

"Incorporates 3rd-party DRM: Easy Anticheat"


Killed any interest I may have had.

View this comment - View article - View full comments