Avatar_of_Self

joined 5 months ago
[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Flatpak doesn't come with more libraries to interact with other flatpaks. It comes with libraries that the application's flatpak you're downloading requires. However, when installing the flatpak those libraries do not get installed if they are already on the system.

So widget-flatpak needs lib-a and lib-b. You're system already has lib-b that flatpak is using for as another flatpak.

You install widget-flatpak. lib-a gets installed but lib-b does not because you already have it.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Doubtful either will do anything but maybe make a report that might be ready if they are murdered. Cops will say there is nothing they can do because nobody is hurt. I'd bet a field agent would never call you back or show up.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (10 children)

I know that. That still misses the point. The point of the law is to clarify that on digital storefronts that you make purchases for licensed digital goods, that you can't imply to the consumer that they actually own those goods. It doesn't matter if there is an offline installer. It doesn't matter if you can 'keep your installers forever'.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (12 children)

It doesn't really matter because it doesn't change the point that people think they own digital goods when they don't. GOG may have a more consumer friendly system in place but it doesn't change what has happened with people's music, movies, shows, games and music in games at these digital storefronts, where people have clicked "Buy X" and later on, it's no longer in their libraries anymore. This has happened even when the business still exists and is still providing digital goods.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Right, if you download the offline installers, then they can't stop you from doing whatever you're going to do with it but you don't own them. Legally, you can't sell them, transfer them to someone else, etc.

There are other sections that make the lack of ownership by you clear and that you still have to abide by the publisher's/developer's licensing agreements but Section 10 states the situation outright:

Section 10 of the GOG user agreement says:

GOG content is owned by its developers/publishers and licensed by us.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago (23 children)

It should because their use agreement makes it clear that you don't own the games but are licensing them. That's pretty much why they had to clarify what they said I'd imagine. IMO, proving the point of the law, really.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

So, for ventilators, I'd definitely prefer a DIY repair attempt and rolling the dice instead of having a ventilator that doesn't work, especially when you absolutely need them but don't have them.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They didn't lose their case in front of SCOTUS. SCOTUS just decided not to hear the case so the lower court's ruling stood in that lower jurisdiction.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

You might as well criticize someone that uses a mirror in spite of blind people existing.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

The Elder Scrolls 6: Skyrim 2

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

They won't because there is an old sewer main that runs underneath and according to the town is prohibitively expensive to reconcile all of that with the bridge lowering.

The rail line won't increase the height anymore because then it will cause a hump in the train tracks there.

[–] Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It isn't going to be one or the other (if they don't offer a 401k, then you can use IRAs), unless you just make a bad choice. An employer can contribute to a 401k and also provide a pension (mine used to but I've been around long enough that I get both the pension and 401k with matching) but if I had a choice, I could pick a pension for example but also put money into an IRA for retirement that would normally go to a 401k.

If you absolutely had to pick one, it isn't going to be the same answer for everyone. Amounts, what you're able to contribute, matching, risks and tax situations are going to vary from person to person and their employer.

As far as controlling your money, some 401k's allow some extra control, some don't but most have a middle ground except for their company stock which you can usually directly buy. If you're 401k allows general different 'markets' and/or 'lifecycle' buckets (they get more conservative on investment risk the closer you get to your retirement age) is, at the end of the day, all controlled by a broker and they are making the actual decision as to what to invest and how. Some plans may allow you to invest into individual stocks through the 401k's brokerage though.

At the end of the day though, if all you had was a pension offered which you aren't going to be contributing your income to, then you should invest in some sort of retirement plan yourself, be it an IRA, money market, bonds, CDs or whatever.

view more: next ›