fox_the_apprentice

get’s [sic] a lot of downvotes by people who simply don’t like that particular post.

That’s literally the point of the downvote system. To downvote posts you don’t like, or you feel are out of place.

Additionally we are seeing posts with more downvotes than a community has subscribers, meaning people are downvoting content they don’t even want to see in the first place.

This seems to be the real issue you’re trying to fight. It seems like only permitting downvotes on communities that the user has been a part of for greater than 1/2/7/30/pick-a-number days would be the proper solution. If people in a community are downvoting a post, then it means they don’t think that post is worth sharing. No admin, moderator, community owner, etc. should be able to change that.

I am strongly against removing downvotes.

the lack of new first party exclusives

This is good; exclusivity hurts consumers.

Suddenly corporations have to pay them a wage and medical care. Brilliant.

Don’t most Kindle books permit you to download a free sample?

Don’t feel too bad; I also have length problems all the time!

Please consider using punctuation!

GN has made a section on this at the start of their HW News video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3byz3txpso

I don’t see that already posted here. Of particular note is that Linus lied regarding the Billet Labs repayment agreement. Otherwise, I’ll let Steve speak for himself.

It’s his job to say who should buy it.

No.

It’s his job to provide accurate data, and possibly a recommendation for those wanting to know his opinion.

It’s the consumer’s job to look at the data in the review and determine whether or not to buy it.

You don’t see GN failing to properly review a 4070 Ti because “nobody should buy this”. They do the review properly and then say “nobody should buy this” after having given accurate data.

You don’t get to skip doing your literal job just because you don’t think the product is worth buying.

Did you do a full OS reset/reinstall

This, specifically from a fresh install media created directly from Microsoft’s site. Every PC manufacturer has a lot of bloatware as they attempt to separate themselves from their competitors via (sometimes hazardous) software.

Some slight additions:

Google gives their word that Chrome itself will keep it disabled for a random 5% of users at launch.

I’ve emphasized what I view to be the problems.

1. This requires you to trust that Google will actually do this at launch; and to be fair I expect they probably will. That said, it’s not a legally binding statement. Promises are cheap.

2. This requires you to trust that the ‘random 5% of users’ figure will remain a thing forever, and not be silently rolled back in a Chrome update two years from release once most of the complaints die down.

https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/5842658 <- please include source!

Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/2165/

The first is that I don’t understand how this doesn’t also apply to Steam or Epic Games or any other basic storefront (except GOG of course).

There were three points in the post you’re replying to. Not all Steam games have DRM; I’m going to assume we’re talking only about games using the their DRM:

1. DRM server shutting off -> Steam has been around for a long time, longer than Denuvo. Steam makes a lot more money than Denuvo. Steam is not as publicly hated as Denuvo. Because of these things, I don’t think Steam will be shutting down any time soon; Denuvo shutting down is a much larger concern, especially due to public perception. Here’s a decent answer to the question anyways: https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/255424/what-will-happen-to-my-owned-games-if-steam-were-to-close .

TL;DR 1: It’s not as much of a concern for Steam as it is for Denuvo.

2. Game company shuts off and is unable to pay DRM subscription -> This depends on the license agreement between the DRM provider and the company. The comment you’re replying to implies that Denuvo has a subscription fee for its use in a product, and I’m going to proceed under this assumption. I doubt Steam requires any form of subscription fee to keep the DRM working - I would expect that, as they are a storefront, they pay for that via a percentage of game sales. Denuvo isn’t a storefront, so I would expect if they have a subscription fee then this would be a Denuvo concern that doesn’t apply to Steam.

TL;DR 2: Steam is a storefront, and it’s expected that their sales percentage would cover DRM costs for the game. This is a concern for Denuvo, but not really one for Steam.

3. Internet going off -> Steam has a well-known offline feature that works reasonably well. Companies that use the Stream DRM system are using libraries intended to work with this feature - that’s not to say they can’t purposefully make it unplayable offline, but it’s generally well-done. The problem is that it requires you to enable offline mode before your Internet goes out. This is something that’s regularly complained about, so I don’t think your “[…] I don’t understand how this doesn’t also apply to Steam […]” statement applies.

TL;DR 3: Steam DRM is regularly complained about in this regard.

I dislike Epic , so I’m not the person to give them a reasonable defense/discussion - you’ll have to find someone else for that.