Of course they do. They want to keep control over monetization. They don't care about creators at all.

Ok, sounds like the standard claim for everything to me to be honest.

Can someone explain in short what problem people had about Omegle?

Was it that you can say things (and show things) there to a random person without any good possibility to trace it back to you because it's anonymous and more "temporary" then something like Lemmy for example?

Or was it just a witch hunt without any real reasonable structure?

This is a reference to an original star war movie poster, if you wonder why it looks familiar.

Well obviously... But as a German I must say there is no possibly to use PeerTube in any legally save way in Germany.

That is not the fault of PeerTube of course it's the fault of copyright mafia and German politics. Since PeerTube uses P2P to distribute load among all (which is extremely clever and should definitely not change), German law makes you responsible for anything you upload even if it's in a P2P manner. So if you just accidentally clicked on a video containing Copyright protected Material or illegal content, you are seen as contributor of this content with all consequences.

So imagine going to jail because you clicked the wrong video... This is as stupid as it sounds and needs to change. Sadly German public is not carrying about this enough. I hope PeerTube will become more popular one day so that people are confronted to this insane law more frequently.

I'm quite sure they will only allow this in EU (and maybe USA). If they do allow this in China, Regime will most probably ban every alternative app Store... if this is not already banned.

Thought and prayers to the people of china. I feel like they lost everything in 1989. Still hope they find the strength to get rid of this depressing system.

I don't get it... "D" is a complete different character than "d" is.

It's like wondering why "file1" is not opened when I typed in "file2".

Don't want to sound arrogant, but most people here (including OP and the writers of the article) don't seam to know much about video game development.

Because statements like "... Isn't about graphics or frame rate; it's memory" don't make sense at all.

Because if you fast memory is to small you would either more often read from a slower memory which results in less frame rate or you would need to make the stuff that fill up your memory (most often textures) smaller (lower resolution) which "reduces graphics"

The article says something more business politics related: "Microsoft requires all games to run, feature-complete and without changes in quality or mechanics" on both Versions S and X. I'm not really believe this to be true because this would make the existence of more powerful X version completely pointless. However what I think can be the case is that Microsoft QA is forcing the studio to adapt the game for the series S before it could be published. This needs time. Since there is no low spec version for the PS5 there is no need for additional adaptations.

Did we mentioned that it is closed source proprietary service controlled by only one company that can dictate the terms of it's usage?

Actually mastodon is the more viable option for journalist, because you're not depending on the good will of a company (or some rich people in control of it) to not block you or restrict where you can be seen and where not.

It's just that so many people don't care about this.

Meanwhile my cat after reading this theory...

And that's when you remember why you have been an average AMD enjoyer.