There are two definitions:

S: (n) capitalist (a conservative advocate of capitalism)

S: (n) capitalist (a person who invests capital in a business (especially a large business))

No. See Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube Music, and Tidal. They all contain something like 99% content overlap. You can subscribe to any of them and access almost all music. The difference is price, performance, UX, and features.

I’m a capitalist but even I think visual media needs a come to Jesus. If they had adopted the Spotify model everyone would be a lot happier. I would be paying for content still. Instead they broke up into a dozen different services with walled content. This is so stupid. I have no qualms keeping my own collection when this is the paid offering.

I hit my limit years ago when Netflix removed the (then) very good rating system in favour of their algorithmically gamed thumbs up/down. Then they started auto playing content when one hovered over it. Then they started cutting third party movies and shows in favour of their own… content. I was paying a lot for the privilege of an inferior experience. Now I have a Plex server with everything I like in one place, no ads, and real ratings on the content. Sonarr and Radarr are my favourite apps ever.

The responses have classic “I run Arch” energy. It’s never the fault of the software. It’s always the fault of the user. Ignore them. This is terrible UX and should be criticised. She did absolutely nothing wrong.

You have been banned from r/DataHoarder.

I agree. Most movies of mine are 1080p, which look great with high enough bitrate. 4K is for the big flashy movies which clearly benefit.

Nope, just a video. I should check out some games…

I could not disagree more. It’s like I’m actually motor-boating three beautiful women’s massive bosoms at the same time. And it’s like they’re all really sitting on my face. I’m using a Quest though so I’m not sure if there’s a difference. Just make sure you’re using large file sizes. 10GB+.

To be fair we’ve never had more choice, and music has almost never been more affordable. We used to buy singles for like $10+. Albums for $20+. Now there are several competing streaming services where we can listen to almost unlimited music each month for less than the cost of one album. Hell, YouTube Premium includes unlimited music steaming for free. Being an independent artist has never been easier, and you can find and pay for any music you like directly with millions of your favourite artists all over the world. The industry used to be entirely controlled by large labels. Honestly, I consider the industry far healthier than it used to be.

I pirate movies and shows because they refuse to create a Spotify-like service. Content is fragmented across a dozen services, they’re infested with ads, content quality keeps declining, the interfaces suck, and prices are outpacing inflation. I pay for Spotify because it’s still a good service for a reasonable price.

Yes! I pay for an ad free experience on YouTube but support tells me that ads for their own products don’t count. Fuckers.

It’s a fair criticism but I find the drawbacks to be quite tolerable compared to the benefits. Each person must do their own calculus. As the user above alluded to, there are apps which make the experience almost seamless. My two favourite apps ever are Radarr and Sonarr.

I think many of us anticipated Apple’s malicious compliance. Now we see if the EU really will hold them to account. I’m tentatively optimistic but I admit I’ll be very disappointed if Apple wins this. It will cement their position of power globally as untouchable, and that’s a terrible outcome for the whole world. I am very disappointed that the EU permitted Apple to declare iOS as distinct from all other mobile operating systems. They even permitted them to exclude iPadOS as a Core Platform Service. Just that decision alone now excludes all Apple TVs, iPads, the Vision, and Watch. I hope that decision is also revisited.

There hasn’t been the same purge here in Europe. I think the US tech industry is very large, and covid saw demand surge, resulting in a lot of hiring. Demand slumped which led to this. We’re not seeing the same purge in other industries. Headcount just needs to normalise again, which I think won’t take much longer. Unfortunately there is a compounding factor: interest rates. Tech was propped up by free money. Without that, we might see larger structural issues in the industry. If companies start failing then we enter a new phase in the layoffs.

Exactly. Avoiding the clear intent of a law by using weasel words has always pissed me off about the U.S. legal system.

There really doesn’t appear to be any room for misinterpretation or negotiation on this one. From the DMA:

(57) If dual roles are used in a manner that prevents alternative service and hardware providers from having access under equal conditions to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used by the gatekeeper in the provision of its own complementary or supporting services or hardware, this could significantly undermine innovation by such alternative providers, as well as choice for end users. The gatekeepers should, therefore, be required to ensure, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of its own complementary and supporting services and hardware. Such access can equally be required by software applications related to the relevant services provided together with, or in support of, the core platform service in order to effectively develop and provide functionalities interoperable with those provided by gatekeepers. The aim of the obligations is to allow competing third parties to interconnect through interfaces or similar solutions to the respective features as effectively as the gatekeeper’s own services or hardware.

(7) The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper. Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.

This is black and white. Access must be free of charge. There are provisions for necessary limitations to access based on security risks, but there are no provisions for charging a fee for access.

This might be their strategy. There’s no way they could come to the conclusion they’d be allowed to continue charging a fee for access. The DMA is explicit:

(57) If dual roles are used in a manner that prevents alternative service and hardware providers from having access under equal conditions to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used by the gatekeeper in the provision of its own complementary or supporting services or hardware, this could significantly undermine innovation by such alternative providers, as well as choice for end users. The gatekeepers should, therefore, be required to ensure, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of its own complementary and supporting services and hardware. Such access can equally be required by software applications related to the relevant services provided together with, or in support of, the core platform service in order to effectively develop and provide functionalities interoperable with those provided by gatekeepers. The aim of the obligations is to allow competing third parties to interconnect through interfaces or similar solutions to the respective features as effectively as the gatekeeper’s own services or hardware.

(7) The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper. Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.

It’s an incredibly risky strategy, as the fine is payable immediately. That’s up to $38B for the first offence. They’ve had years to check compliance with the EU, so leaving it to the last minute then claiming “confusion” won’t be a valid defence. If Apple continues to renege on their legal responsibilities, a second fine of up to $76B can be levied. There are additional fees for late payments and other infractions too. The EU legal system uses the principle of the spirit of the law. This is contrasted with the US system which is the “letter of the law.” As such, constructive evasion isn’t taken lightly in the EU. Anything but free access is clearly intentional non-compliance.

If we look at just Europe, Slovakia, Finland, and Belarus all brought new reactors online last year alone. There are another six reactors currently under construction, and another 33 planned. France and Sweden recently announced their strategic commitment to nuclear power for a variety of reasons.

One major technological breakthrough is Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). These are far more cost effective, very safe (the reactor shuts down in the event of loss of power and coolant), and require a much smaller footprint. Rolls-Royce is on target to deliver the first of these in 2030.

The example you provide is an example of poor governance, not an inherent limitation of the technology. There are also examples of poor governance regarding renewable energy all over the world.

This was a far smarter premise. I wonder if it would have been as popular had they kept it.

Massively subsidized

Nuclear energy is four times cheaper than renewables when externalities like baseline generation are imputed: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544222018035?via%3Dihub

where do you put all the nuclear waste?

While more dangerous, the quantity of waste generated compared to all other forms of energy generation is very small. Storage is a solved problem, but you have probably read articles about a lack of storage in the U.S. This is entirely due to politicians’ failure to agree on where to store waste. Despite the relative safety, no one wants nuclear waste stored in their “back yard.”

And before you say it: no, nuclear energy is not green.

Nuclear energy generates zero CO2. Surely we can agree that this is the most pressing consideration in terms of climate change. If your concern is the nuclear waste, then I direct you to the growing problem of disposing of solar cells and wind turbines. Newer turbine blades, for example, are 40 meters long and weigh 2.5 tons. These cannot be recycled.

No matter how you cut the data, nuclear is an order of magnitude better than almost all other forms of energy generation. If our goal is to radically improve our environmental footprint while keeping the lights on even at night when it’s not windy, then nuclear absolutely must be part of the mix.