Lootboxes are legalized gambling for minors. So yeah, no shit it works. Just because a thing is profitable doesn't make it good. The opioid epidemic proved very profitable, but just like gambling for kids, doesn't make it a thing we should accept or want for our society.
DrJenkem
joined 1 year ago
Yes, that is how it works under capitalism.
Under socialism however, the state funds labor based on needs and/or desires for the output of that labor (the commodity). In this case, the money isn't used for the goal of making more money, therefore, this isn't capital at all. And yet, the labor happens and the commodity created. Therefore, the production is independent of the capital.
Lol, there's plenty of opportunity to make money under socialism. You just have to do the labor. Under capitalism, however, there exists opportunity to derive money from other people's surplus labor value, for example, I can pay a worker $4 to make a thing that requires $1 in supplies and sell that for $10. That difference of $5 is stolen surplus value from the laborer. Socialists seek to abolish this parasitic relationship.
While certainly capitalist, Denmark and Sweden use the nordic model which tends to lean pretty social-democrat/welfare-state.
Not to mention, much of bribery under capitalist states is legalized and codified. For example, I'm guessing their study didn't consider Super-PACs as a form of corruption or bribery. Even though that's clearly what they are.
Given the context of the meme being a picture of Karl Marx, I was using the Marxist definition of capital. Marxists.org provides a pretty digestible definition: https://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/c/a.htm
Even if we suppose that's true, you're still failing to illustrate how capital is necessary for production under socialism.
Within the confines of capitalism I would probably agree. But under socialism, production happens independently of capital accumulation.
No, games require labor to develop.
And you're able to transcode 4k with that? 1080p with hardware offload isn't surprising, but 4k really requires some extra horsepower.
EDIT: Maybe I'm wrong, seems like quicksync even on a Celeron has gotten pretty good.
I don't know for certain, but I think you'll ultimately have to decide between either low power consumption or 4k transcoding. I doubt you'll be able to achieve both.
Exactly. That's why I don't enable email notifications on my phone, and I won't see your 4am email until I roll into the office at 9:15am.
Well, it kind of depends on the exact type of DRM being used. But yeah, some types of streaming DRM can be circumvented with a screen capture, but these will always be worse quality. There are two types for movies and shows you'll see online when the source is a streaming site, either WEB-DL or WEB-Rip. WEB-Rip is sourced via a screen capture, I'm not super familiar, but there exists a standard called HDCP which is supposed to protect the content at the hardware/HDMI level. My understanding is this is largely ineffective as the HDCP master encryption keys have been in the public for quite some time. WEB-DL is when the raw video/audio is downloaded from the streaming provider and decrypted through some means, this is where defeating the browser-based (often Widevine) DRM often comes into play.