Jump to content

Brooksie359

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,216

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Brooksie359

  1. Brooksie359
    Clearly the judge of the lawsuit didn't agree because they basically said that Apple can ban epic for life based on their bad behavior. Don't get me wrong you can absolutely break tos if it is illegal but typically this is more applicable in defensive scenarios. Basically if you break tos that isn't legal then you are probably OK if the company tries to sue based on the tos violation because it no longer becomes legally binding. Doing the opposite is a completely different situation because in most cases companies can choose to not do business with another company if they don't follow their business agreement. Also epics lawsuit never resulted in a court decision saying that apples tos wasn't legal. It was a new EU regulation that resulted in the change.
  2. Brooksie359
    Valid strategy or not it does make sense why Apple would be concerned that epic might just not comply with tos again to bait a lawsuit.
  3. Brooksie359
    Yeah 4 dims on ddr5 is just bad right now. You basically have to sacrifice alot of performance just for the extra memory. Also I doubt 64gb of ram will be an issue anytime soon and like someone else suggested you can always go 2x48 if you really are worried about ram being an issue like 7 years from now.
  4. Brooksie359
    Gaming can be addictive but so can alot of things. I know people who had an addiction to running to the point that they had trouble stopping even when they had shin splints. Really anything can be addictive to some degree especially if it triggers chemicals in the brain like dopamine or for running it could be endorphins. Honestly one of the most common addictions that people don't even think about is sugar. I would imagine there are alot of people who are addicted to sugar.
  5. Brooksie359
    You clearly don't understand the reason why Apple banned Epic. If you had a company that criticized your tos then it's a non issue. If you have a company that criticized your tos then intentionally breaks that tos just so they could sue when they were banned for breaking tos then yeah it becomes a problem. I think Apple was alot more concerned about epic actually complying and not pulling the same bs again which is stated as much in the email to epic asking them to put into writing that they will act in good faith to not break tos.
  6. Brooksie359
    Yes because the only possible way someone would pay 4 dollars to play some games is if it was an emergency. It couldn't possibly be because they are traveling for work and happen to want to play some games one day and 4 dollars would allow them to do that. People pay 8 dollars for coffee so .
  7. Brooksie359
    I could see this being something one might use for travel or other one off events that wouldn't justify anything more than a one day subscription.
  8. Brooksie359
    That isn't what fabricated means. Also it relies on previously tos violations and past behavior which is pretty reasonable. Could epic be acting in good faith? Maybe but apple has no obligation to work with them regardless and can simply keep them banned based on the prior tos violation.
  9. Brooksie359
    I would hardly say it is a bs reason. They did deliberately break tos in the past to try for financial gain under the premise that the law would be on their side hence the lawsuit they filed. Now they say that apples tos is bs and problematic so why would apple not think epic would simply break tos again with the same justifications of the law being on their side. I'm sorry but to call their reason bs is just untrue. Sure you can disagree with their decision but I would hardly say it is some fabricated reason.
  10. Brooksie359
    What main competitor? Epic? They banned epic a long time ago and they just happened to ban Epics Swedish account and probably in large part because they were criticizing apples new tos. They basically think epic is going to not comply with the new tos and when Apple trys to ban them for not complying they will likely sue again like they did in the past. I would say that such a scenario isn't out of the question. I could easily see epic pulling such a stunt based on Tim's prior conduct and the way he is currently talking about apples tos.
  11. Brooksie359
    Addictions can be caused by a bunch of different things and it's probably good to know what is causing your addiction before you can really think of a solution. For some it is as simple as easy source of dopamine that just need a fix but usually that isn't that hard to kick unless you have adhd in which case medication typically helps. Also replacing with healthy sources of dopamine helps alot. It becomes much harder if the phone usage is due to other reasons like avoiding negative emotions or lack of meaniful things. Those would need to be fixed first before the addiction issue can be tackled.
  12. Brooksie359
    Well that is one less program you have to worry about. I use kindle app to download my books so I can use a third party app so I can use it ok my eReader which doesn't support kindle library.
  13. Brooksie359
    You do know they have a windows version of the kindle app right? Not sure why you would need to get the android one as you can read stuff offline with the windows version just fine.
  14. Brooksie359
    One thing that might make it a bit complicated is that I think that the court ruling was in the US and not the EU so it might be the case where the EU would require apple to unban epic in the EU.
  15. Brooksie359
    It was in the lawsuit but I think the biggest violation was circumventing apples payment system to sell in app items. Sure now they would be allowed to do that but at the time when they violated tos it wasn't allowed. This is what started the original lawsuit and the court basically gave Apple the go ahead to permaban epic.
  16. Brooksie359
    Epic games went and violated apples terms of service. Epic games went and sued and the court determined that apple is justified in the banning and can ban them. Sure this did end up leading to the EUs new laws that require side loading and other regulations but that is a separate issue. Honestly it would be a bad example to make if they let epic get away with violating tos and litigating them about it. The idea that apple should get fined for following a courts determination is super dumb.
  17. Brooksie359
    Honestly I do think if this goes through then maybe they need to change the way they monetize because it does cost money to have Spotify on apple apps store so if they can no longer get their 30% cut then how do they pay for those costs? Do they just eat the cost? Regardless I think there does become and issue if Spotify can completely circumvent paying for their app to be on the app store.
  18. Brooksie359
    It wasn't just meta. If you looked at downdetector you can see basically all major websites having a ton of reports of it being down. Someone somewhere messed up big time.
  19. Brooksie359
    The issue is that trying to just slap on a kernel level anticheat at the end of the game development cycle is a pretty awful solution to anticheat. Ideally you would code the game in a way that has anticheat built in like added checks built in and also not giving clients data that could be used for cheats. In know for league of legends they don't give any data on what is in the fog of war to clients until slightly before stuff becomes visible. This means at most a map hack would only give info on the very edge of the fog of war which makes it mostly useless. Compare that to starcraft which stored the whole distribution of enemy units on the entire map making map hacks basically let you know where everything is. Granted for it to be really good you would want a good red team that have intimate knowledge on game hacks so they could figure out issues and ways to avoid or mitigate them during the making of the game. Granted that likely costs more than simply slapping kernel level anticheat and call it a day so it is understandable why companies don't do that often.
  20. Brooksie359
    Yeah my thought are similar in the sense that people who know coding can use AI to write code or parts of code to speed up their process. All of that said you still need to learn coding to use it effectively making Nvidia's CEOs statements super dumb imo. I mean I don't think AI changes how much code your colleague has to know.
  21. Brooksie359
    Even if it is something simple I would still say you would want someone with basic programming knowledge to look at what it spits out to make sure it works and there is no issues. Sure if it is something you don't care if it messes up then you could just trust AI to spit something out and run with it and deal with any potential bugs or issues but that wouldn't fly in my feild of work but maybe it is different for other people. I think this will mostly be used as something to help programmers rather than replace them. Certainly this could make entry level programming way faster which might result in less demand for those type of programmers but I don't think it will make them disappear.
  22. Brooksie359
    I would say that this probably won't be the case. The biggest issue I see is that if you don't know how something works then there can be bugs and issues that would take quite a bit of testing to ensure what the AI spits out actually works. The idea that Joe from accounting will be able to do that is just unrealistic. I think AI is likely be a good tool for software developers to use to help them but that won't replace them.
  23. Brooksie359
    Yeah I think most won't bother to account for tooling as that is alot like R&D and is mostly an upfront cost. That said I wouldn't doubt that the tooling wouldn't be a significant cost if they don't do large volume sales as tooling tends to be more economical the more you produce.
  24. Brooksie359
    I usually pick monitors based on what I want and what I plan to play not my hardware. Obviously money is also a factor to keep in mind but I do find that people often times will limit their monitor purchase to what their system can use to the fullest 100% of the time which isn't realistic. I mean anyone who buys a 360hz 1440p monitor isn't realistically going to run it at 360 fps in all games at 1440p but the point is that if you need 360hz then you have it. Also most people keep monitors for quite a while so chances are that a monitor could last multiple system hardware upgrades that could potentially make further use of the monitor.
  25. Brooksie359
    Again depending on what you are doing the difference can be barely or pretty noticeable but not massive. Like for overwatch the difference is not something I would necessarily describe as barely. I mean if you are super into overwatch then the difference is definitely meaniful even though it isn't huge. Then again if you were that into overwatch you might opt for a 360 or even 540hz monitor at that point.
×