That’s honestly an incredibly good solution.

The unfair advantage argument definitely holds water, mouse and keyboard can be like a sports car racing against a bicycle. But if someone had the budget to tackle this issue through software, it would be Microsoft. So I’m inclined to agree that it’s mostly just MS squeezing money out of third party manufacturers.

If they’d care only about the “unfair”, they’d put a fair, almost free, price on the official license that covers the cost of testing or whatever. Truth presumably here is also a bit more complicated, maybe third party controllers could be easier to hack resulting in an ineffective licensing system, idk. But yeah smells like money for Microsoft and a loss for consumers.

What exactly is Star Citizen? And how does it differ from everything else?

I think it’s the same problem Wes Anderson kinda suffers. They’re trying to do their thing in the way their audience expects them to.

And I don’t really think either is playing a caricature of themselves, there’s real creativity at play. But the creative risks are mitigated by relying on their set style, which makes it safe to consume but often not that exciting. I find Dunkey’s reviews usually pretty interesting, whether I agree with them or not. But this poetry felt closer to an ad than an honest review.

Oh yeah, I see. I guess I’m too used to that stuff that it didn’t struck me as that egregious compared to any other game.

What’s predatory about Diablo 4’s monetization? Seems pretty standard skins and cosmetics stuff. And the battle pass.

But it’s not like you get better gear or anything, right?

Well it’s the same as with any document, digital or physical, that shows ownership. Obviously it being NFT wouldn’t make it magically legit, same as with anything else.

But like I said I don’t really see a point of that kind database being blockchain/NFT based anyway.

Tying NFT token to a physical object like a painting and keeping a database of who owns what seems potentially interesting. But why would you need it to be NFT based either, I don’t know.

One question I have is that if two people use the same prompt, do they get the same result?

If they do, how could that result be copyrighted because I can just as well reproduce the prompt, making an original “copy”.

If they don’t produce the same result, well it’s not the human that’s really doing the “original” part there, which is what copyright aims to protect, right?

On the other hand if I write an original comic book story and use AI as a tool to create the pictures, that, in my opinion, could be worth copyright protection. But it’s the same as just original story, it’s not really the pictures that are protected.

(And let’s not forget that AIs are mostly just fed stolen works, that needs to be solved first and foremost.)

Could you describe a case example how that applies in practice?

Because yeah I understand that when we all have our own copy of the data someone can’t falsify all our independent copies but is data being tampered like that even the problem?

You could buy it for a crisp 10 when the shit show was at an all time high.

Your honor, the plaintiff wouldn’t have survived cod mw 2 lobby.