meditate

The solution is to support single-sign-on and to allow data importing/export. These are solved problems, but companies don't receive enough pressure to do them because they are more interested in building moats.

That is exactly the problem I was addressing, which is that the reason monopoly looks good is because the current systems we're looking are so entrenched and require DRM, which is a tool that actively and deliberately prevents platforms from innovating. Following this, it's no surprise that Netflix and Amazon are turning to making their own films, and that Origin only exists because Steam's monopoly means that EA couldn't negotiate acceptable licensing terms with Valve. Get rid of the DRM and there is plenty of reason to compete in ways that help customers. Then give them a way to easily transfer ownership between supporting platforms and everybody wins.

You don't want that. The end result is a system that looks a lot like youtube where bots rule the platform and the numbers are constantly gamed.

The issue I have is not that the vendor (Steam, Netflix, etc) is imposing DRM, but that the copyright holders demand it, and that there are cases where the vendor gives into these demands. You're right that Steam doesn't do this in all cases, but in some they do.

>Pirating games has never been as unattractive as it has been today due to Steam's monopoly and ubiquity.

This is a cop out to me. I have never been a fan of DRM for this reason, because it requires an unassailable monopoly for customers not to notice that it's a problem. I am probably in the minority because I've never been happy with Steam's service because of this, but as long as they are the 800 pound gorilla in the room then they obviously never will listen to any of my complaints.

If you take this line of thinking to movies, it leads to dangerous ideas like "everyone but my favorite streaming service should just close down" which is totally ridiculous, but still when I talk to friends about this issue they are quick to propose that as the solution! It really makes me try to avoid contact with the digital publishing industry as much as possible. What we see now is the movie studios' response to that which is:

- To increase the size of the data dramatically (4K+ video) so that casual sharing requires hardware investment and thus remains difficult

- To make things highly dependent on a very specialized backend to work correctly (Netflix's recent experiment with branching narratives)

- To start bundling it with other things (Amazon Prime)

- To offer streaming analytics as a better data platform than the traditional Nielsen ratings

- And probably more I can't think of right now

The thing is that these are all real value adds which I am glad to see them competing on. Right now all the downstream vendors are forced to invest in rolling their own DRM. I would rather see copyright holders offering a system where a proof of purchase can be transferred between services, but they would need to band together to actually do it and start putting that into their contracts. Can you imagine if we had that instead of DRM?

If the moral aspect of it is really important to you then I hope you can find the path to trying again in a different capacity that doesn't compromise on your health. If not then forget I said anything.

The AGPL does have traction, just not in the places you might expect to look. I think that's a red herring anyway because it is indeed a niche license, useful specifically for free software communities where growth and development focused around a network API is happening actively and rapidly, and there is active worry that a bad actor could move in and try to take over the network. This is absolutely not the only issue threatening free software communities currently because not all of them fit that description, so I see why it is quite common for people to dismiss the AGPL. But know that it may just not be what is correct for your use case, and that for many communities a lot of other licenses are still adequate, including the non-copyleft licenses that you have mentioned are gaining a lot of traction due to their popularity within proprietary, closed-source companies.

I have heard a lot of rambling recently about "post-open source" and "post-free software" movements lately but I still think it's jumping the gun. The fact that it's still so difficult to find working libre drivers for wifi chips (and a lot of other pieces of hardware) is proof to me that we still have a lot of work to do, not a convenient excuse to dismiss things entirely and stop caring.

Of course they don't care, why would they be given a chance to? The anti-features, inconveniences and limitations are not advertised and are downplayed whenever anyone mentions them.

Veganism might have been a fad for you, but for others it is a necessary undertaking to remain healthy. I can't blame you for finding some choices difficult to make, but at the same time it's disheartening to see these "anti-religion" arguments brought out to dismiss the very real need of people (and companies) to be able to retain control of their own devices, for their own purposes which are not explicitly approved by the vendor.

I can't speak for the person you're responding to, but it doesn't seem like much of a mystery why non-techies don't know about the specific details of why they can't save a streamed movie to watch it offline, or in a non-approved open source video player. That glib attitude of captive audiences is exactly what DRM vendors prey upon. They know exactly how much they can get away with at this point.

I won't deny that. With the exception of long-distance running, all of those are cost-prohibitive luxury activities, just like gaming.

I only speak from personal experiences with the business side of things. It's a combination of despotic upstream vendors, highly addictive products aimed towards children, lack of regulations, abusive working environments, and a general contentedness with profiting directly from the misfortunes of others. I do not believe any corners of the industry are safe from this attitude at the moment, despite the marketing veneer they may put on. And yes, if I sound cynical, it's because I am suffering from burnout at the moment.

I agree with you, but I still am highly disturbed by "whale hunting" aka certain entities manipulating those types of people into spending as much money as possible in exchange for being able to withdraw even further from productive society.

I personally reject "hours of enjoyment" as a metric for value and depth of a purchased game. It's good to hear that you've had positive experiences, but the dark side is that for many it drifts towards being an addictive time-suck that eats money for nothing in return.

The common uses of AGPL I've seen are in direct response to the big players trying to swallow things up into their cloud platforms while not giving back to the community. So you can blame those entities for the toxicity.