https://www.iso-ne.com/ Looking at my own region of New England, renewables are only at about 8% right now. And that includes burning wood, refuse, and landfill gas as renewable sources.

Given r=f(θ), we are generally not concerned with r′=f′(θ); that describes how fast r changes with respect to θ

You're using the derivative of a polar equation as the basis for what a tangent line is. But as the textbook explains, that doesn't give you a tangent line or describe the slope at that point. I never bothered defining what "tangent" means, but since this seems so important to you why don't you try coming up with a reasonable definition?

I think we fundamentally don't agree on what "tangent" means. You can use

x=f(θ)cosθ, y=f(θ)sinθ to compute dydx

as taken from the textbook, giving you a tangent line in the terms used in polar coordinates. I think your line of reasoning would lead to r=1 in polar coordinates being a line, even though it's a circle with radius 1.

Given r=f(θ), we are generally not concerned with r′=f′(θ); that describes how fast r changes with respect to θ

I think this part from the textbook describes what you're talking about

Instead, we will use x=f(θ)cosθ, y=f(θ)sinθ to compute dydx.

And this would give you the actual tangent line, or at least the slope of that line.

Apex Legends is a battle royale, Gigantic and Battleborn are (were) more like MOBAs, Paladins and Dirty Bomb don't work on linux. I haven't played all of these games, but I don't think they're as interchangeable as you're implying.

Hey now, what did Microsoft's Activision Blizzard King ever do to you?

No, I don't think you're going to do anything either way. When there was only the Raytheon protest, I doubt you called your state representatives about Palestine. Now that they're also blocking traffic, I'm sure you'll continue to do nothing.

I think the most effective protest would be one that directly acts against what they're protesting against, like putting traffic cones on self driving cars or the Tyre Extinguishers deflating tires.

But that kind of protest doesn't really apply to sending billions of dollars worth of weapons overseas unless you want to do something very illegal or violent. So whatever the people protesting think will help seems good enough to me.

Alright, if you’re not convinced that there ought to naturally be differentiated pricing, and that the uniform pricing we see is artificial, I don’t know where else to go.

I think my point was more that publishers aren't going to do that. Back when digital wasn't the default, it was acknowledged that selling a download was a fair bit cheaper and easier than manufacturing disks or carts that could easily be resold by the customer after they were done with it, but the pricing didn't change to reflect that. This kind of thing has been going on for a long time, and not just with steam.

Anyway, I enjoyed the discussion but I’m going to call it here.

Fair enough, good night.

I don’t know what you envision when you say “stick around”.

I would expect people to start buying games from the epic games store. They'd be using it regularly and have a sense of ownership over the games they have in their libraries.

What evidence would be needed to convince you?

Honestly, I'm mostly just being pedantic. I'm perfectly willing to believe this kind of clause exists, but I want to acknowledge that at least for now there's no actual evidence of it.

What other explanation for the observed behavior can be put forth?

For games being the same price on different store fronts? Whatever the justification for selling digital games at the same price as physical games was back when digital purchases were becoming mainstream, or for the same reason that Nintendo games will rarely go on sale: because there are still people willing to pay.

“Selectively enforced” is the wording used by Valve’s own employee.

Is it? Because I pulled the term from the complaint filed Apr 27, 2021 under the Price Veto Provision section. Where did you see a valve employee saying it?

Not to be nitpicky (because this might be solid counter-evidence), but do we know that in a universe without the Steam MFN policy Ubisoft wouldn’t have listed the games concurrently on Steam for 18% higher?

We can go back and look at the historical prices for The Division 2 and see that Ubisoft didn't have a lower baseline price on their own store compared to the epic store. So either Epic has an MFN policy as well, or Ubisoft would most likely want to keep their prices consistent across platforms and stores.

Strikes me as a little beside the point. A randomly rolled free game once a week isn’t going to change anyone’s purchasing habits or change the landscape of the marketplace. If I want to buy game XYZ, the free weekly does me no good—at most, it gets me to install Epic (which is what they want). But it isn’t going to change the fact that Steam gives more bang for the buck, all else equal.

That's the thing: you're being given a random game every week and that's still not enough to get people to stick around. The games they're giving away are often pretty good too, and yet it's not enough to convince people that the Epic Games Store is worth using. And looking at the store now, it seems they're just giving back 5% of the money you spend, meaning if you opt into their ecosystem, all their games actually are cheaper. At some point you need to admit that people won't abandon steam just because prices are lower somewhere else. Because the alternative would mean that piracy would be everyone's preferred method of getting games.

The fact remains, that Steam is preventing games from being listed for less on Epic. So if price isn’t the most important factor, why does Steam feel the need to impose such a policy?

We also don't really know that they do. The source saying that the MFN policy exists at all is the CEO of Epic Games saying so on twitter. And I'm pretty sure the lawsuit says that it's "selectively enforced", so there aren't any actual examples of Valve vetoing a game's price based on the price in another store.

I don't know how to use this site. Samsung is a Korean company, so I look there, but I don't see anything about samsung or phones. Clicking on "mach & elec" or "consumer goods" doesn't seem to help either.