Introduce him to game development with Godot engine. I don’t know any specific tutorials, but you should be able to find something on YouTube.

You can also introduce him to the Free Software movement: https://youtu.be/Ag1AKIl_2GM

He would have to build roads too, but I don’t see why he couldn’t do that. Actually he could have created all of modern technology from the start, but didn’t.

It’s funny how they treated cancer:

Treatment was based on the humour theory of four bodily fluids (black and yellow bile, blood, and phlegm). According to the patient’s humour, treatment consisted of diet, blood-letting, and/or laxatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cancer#Early_diagnosis

I think most youtubers either have sponsors or Patreon. I don’t think they rely on YouTube’s ads anymore.

If popular creators start talking about PeerTube, there will eventually be an audience there, which means there will be money too.

Short term solution: convince other users to use piped.video or FreeTube
Long term solution: convince creators to post on PeerTube

A few of them were libre software, but most of them were abusive proprietary software.

I’m picking on Valve, because their fans defend them so much and act like they are some kind of savior. It’s ridiculous, especially in a community dedicated to free software. They deserve criticism and I don’t care that they are not the only ones. That doesn’t justify their behavior. I want people to recognize that Valve is a bad company. But their fans behave just like Apple fans.

Valve may have been first, may be the biggest, but they are not the only and frankly if it were up to the publishers I think it could be so much worse.

This is doesn’t matter, it’s not an argument. I’m not going to stop criticizing them, because they could abuse us more if they wanted to.

And once you find that nuance, it’s hard to blame Valve alone

That is not an excuse for their behavior. You are defending this company for no good reason. That’s exactly why I made this post.

and you look to see how they may be putting the brakes on it

How? I’m not seeing that at all.

I could abstain from (Steam/EA/Ubisoft) video game purchases but, frankly I already do that. Work doesn’t leave me as much time as my youth…

That would be a good thing. I only buy from GOG and itch.io. Those platforms aren’t perfect either, but they are a big improvement.

Back to piracy, sure, all DRM is broken eventually, hell even Denuvo for a time, but…Valve makes it too easy IMO. They could be constantly working on improving the DRM, keep the pirates on their toes having to put real work in and per-game unique hacks but, they don’t. I have it on good authority that bypassing Steam DRM is not only easy, but the same methods from years ago work today. They are certainly pulling their punches on this, probably because Gaben is willing to die on the hill that piracy is a service issue only, and will not give it any mind.

They have no problem with distributing games that have Denuvo, though. So they are willing to distribute spyware via their store.

That’s a good point.

All three of those links show your plain inability to read. Not one claimed that Valve invented Wine.

They claimed that we should praise Valve for inventing Proton. Proton is just a fork of Wine… It’s hilarious how much you want to defend this company. It’s messing with your ability to think critically.

TURN IT OFF, THEN, DIPSHIT. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS AND CLICK “DON’T UPDATE”. You’re so goddammed enticed with the smell of your own shit you can’t even google “how to turn off auto update”.

I knew most Valve fans had no dignity, but this pathetic even for them.

Yes, it’s so bizarre! Especially in this community.

I’ll cut to the chase: I get what you’re saying that proprietary software by some standards is unethical, and so Valve dealing in proprietary software means they’re unethical… I think surely you would acknowledge that that’s an unusual view though.

It’s not a popular view, but most people haven’t even heard of the free software movement. This community is dedicated to free software, so I expected it to be common here. Proprietary software is incompatible with the mission of the free software movement. You can’t have freedom when someone is actively trying to take it away from you. So we must get rid of non free software.

If what you mean is “Valve, Intuit, Atlassian, Microsoft, Apple, Team Cherry, and every single other manufacturer of proprietary software or games is unethical because of it,” I think you should say so. Nothing wrong with it, you’d be in some good company with it, but that’s a little different than coming at it backwards and saying Valve is abusing their users because every vendor of any type of proprietary software is abusing their users, and Steam is proprietary.

Every developer of proprietary software takes away their user’s freedom and that’s unethical, because people deserve to have control over their computers. Valve is just one of many companies that do it. DRM is also unethical, but Valve isn’t the only company that uses that either. What surprises me though is that people aggressively defend Valve, even in places like this community. It’s strange and it makes no sense. Why defend someone who is taking away your freedom? It’s like watching people defend their own jailer. I think a lot of people here would agree that Microsoft is bad, but they aren’t willing to admit that about Valve. Talking to Valve fans also reminds me of Apple fans, which is why I made this post.

I mean, I think the real answer is like so many things in the money. GNU/Linux can easily be developed as truly free software because the people using it are themselves highly motivated to make it and keep it functioning, but games don’t really work like that (outside of some specific niches like Tagpro, or a little labor of love that someone wants to make e.g. Dwarf Fortress).

You can sell free software. Nothing prevents anyone from making commercial libre games. There are a few games like that one Steam. We just need to make more people realize that this is an option. Indie developers can make this happen. I don’t know if big studios would then do it too, but we have to start somewhere.

If there’s no DRM, some significant number of copies are gonna get copied around without the authors getting paid, and not a lot of people are going to be willing to invest as much effort as a modern game takes and then be ok with that happening. I think it’s rare under this system that you’re gonna see Elden Ring on GOG. That’s not really anything to do on the users’ side; it’s how the incentives are set up for the developers.

If developers think that, then they are wrong. Games with DRM get pirated all the time. Torrents are full of Steam games. The Witcher 3 has been sold on GOG since its launch and it sold very well despite being available in a DRM-free version.

To me the most logical thing if you wanted truly libre games beyond a little niche, would be publicly funding them (or crowdfunding them) and then releasing the results as open source once it’s done and everyone got paid. Honestly, I think a lot of developers and a lot of users would be happier with that system, if there were a way to work out to do it.

That could work, but you can also just sell them like any other game or app. It’s way simpler, but people often forget that option for some reason.

I’ve been seeing people defend those practices for years, though. They are doing that under this very post. They are telling me how it helped the games market or that it’s convenient or that it can’t be avoided. It’s like watching people defend their abuser. So unless we can somehow make people realize that this is terrible, I don’t see how things could change.

Of course there’s also piracy in which case Valve has actually been a tremendous help. A majority of releases it seems are actually just Steam bypasses, because Valve has made a majority of developers content with just Steam DRM, and has done nothing to combat the issue. Now there’s Denuvo to fight that but that’s not Valve special…

Yeah, most of DRM is useless at preventing piracy. Blu-ray might be even easier, since people crack it on their own to make backups. GOG releases don’t have DRM, so they are also often pirated too. I suspect the goal of DRM is mainly to destroy the second hand market.

Yep. I assume that this is legal, though. It’s been like that for many years.

https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/7E78-08DB-AC21-CE32

You can still buy physical PC games, and you can still sell them.

Dude, almost all of them have DRM now. What are you talking about? What am I gonna sell a Steam key that is already assigned to my Steam account? This is something that Valve made happen and no, it wasn’t like this before Steam became popular. Consoles still have a used games market, because physical games don’t have DRM there. It used to be the same on PC.

I’ve never once heard a claim remotely similar to this, sounds 100% made up

https://feddit.de/comment/8084318

https://sh.itjust.works/post/3353959

https://lemmy.world/comment/7389934

Always could.

No, on Steam games are updated automatically.

Sure, it might happen. I’m not going to pay for something that has DRM anyway, so for me nothing will change. I’m pretty sure movies have had DRM longer than games.

People should fight for their rights, though. It doesn’t matter if it’s Valve taking them away or somebody else. Gamers have been screwed over pretty badly over the years and it’s sad to see they don’t care. They even praise the companies that are abusing them.

How has Valve been abusing its users?

With DRM and non free software.

Number one, it’s impossible for me to imagine that big-name publishers would be okay with putting their games on a “go to the web site and download the binary” thing. Presumably they have DRM in the package you download, so you have to “activate” it or something and can’t just send the same binary to 10 friends, at which point… you have avoided having proprietary DRM-encumbered software on your system as part of the steps involved in getting proprietary DRM-encumbered software onto your system.

I don’t know why it’s so hard to imagine for you. I have bought multiple games on GOG. For every game you can download an offline installer and yes you can give it to other people. It is truly DRM-free.

(So Steam works by peer-to-peer file transfer; part of how it’s able to function is sending around binaries between the users. It kind of has to have a client of some sort in order to function the way it does; there are technical reasons why for the model they chose it can’t just be a web site like GOG, even if the developers would be okay with that model, which of course, a lot of the bigger ones wouldn’t.)

Alright, make the client free software then. There would be no ethical issue then, just inconvenience.

Number two, a lot of that indie game landscape that is available on GOG and Itch.io, Valve created over the years right after they created Steam. That’s what I was saying about the hillock. It used to be either your games were shareware, or you found a publisher and probably got denied or else maybe they took control of a lot of the process and kept a lot of the money, and so as a result there really weren’t that many options as far as small games. This little profusion of small indie games just didn’t exist. Valve created a feasible financial and distributional model for it to all work, and at the time it was like a godsend both in terms of who could make games and what variety of games were available.

So you are saying that digital distribution has helped indie developers grow. I don’t deny that and I’m not against digital distribution.

I kinda get what you’re saying – just because their system was better than what came before doesn’t mean it doesn’t have some flaws that should get fixed. But yeah I think some of what you’re listing as flaws aren’t really flaws and I don’t see what the bad things about Steam are. Like it seems like it mostly boils down to “it’s not libre software”… which is understandable, but games is just inherently a proprietary type of landscape anyway, so I don’t see that as a bad thing in the same way that like a proprietary-only web browser would be.

DRM and proprietary software are bad for us. It doesn’t make sense to defend a company that does those things. We should criticize it, so that we can get something better. You are right that most games are proprietary, but maybe some day we will be able to change that too. Right now I see that gamers don’t care about their rights, so they have no chance to change anything. It’s sad.

I don’t think this is true. You can still buy movies on Blu-ray and I don’t think you need internet access to watch them. They have DRM, so it still sucks that you can’t make copies, but people sell used movies.

Used PC games or console games? Are they modern games or old games?

Yeah out of all the shitty behavior in the games industry how are you pickin on Valve

Why not? It’s an unethical company, which has been abusing its users for many years. But for some reason it has a lot of fans.

In my view, the absolute publisher-slams-the-developer-over-a-barrel shit show that was the “before digital distribution” landscape was vastly improved by the advent of Steam. The fact that we’re now on a nice new little hillock where we can see some elements of how much better than this it could potentially be, doesn’t mean it’s all the hillock’s fault that we’re not there yet.

You can have digital distribution without DRM and forcing proprietary software on people. GOG and itch.io are examples of that.

(How would a libre distribution system for presumably-still-sometimes-proprietary games even work? Wouldn’t that make it trivial to crack the games, since you have access to the purchasing code and can modify it to just give yourself all the games?)

You don’t own their servers, so you can’t just add all the games to your account. Itch.io has a libre client and I don’t think you can give yourself all the games.