A streamer I like has been playing Avowed. It’s different in a lot of ways, and on modern detail levels it ends up being smaller, but I feel like it was maybe a bit over-criticized by players.

I guess if we define it loosely I know of a few of those now. Baby Steps, and Easy Delivery Co are simple games about getting around, with some terrain challenges.

If you don’t want your info (whether you are an adult a teen or a child) to be shared with “owners of apps that are on the Epstein list”, then don’t install those apps. There is nothing in this law requiring you to download any particular app.

Linux, as well as any decent system of security, operates via varying levels of trust. If I install a game on Steam, that does not get root access with permission to rewrite my kernel. Similarly, if I have banking info on my device, it doesn’t get to view that, or anything with my face or name. You can install and even run something without trusting it with your life.

If an app were sending this data to a third party, like palantir, then they would be in direct violation of this law.

We have seen time and time again that courts do not provide adequate protections for these types of data breaches. The law does not matter. At the most, software companies get slapped on the wrist, but more likely they get away with it, as “programming is hard, and it’s easier to just send everything”. It is far, far easier to assert that a malicious app is not submitting marketing, or “fuckability” information on your child if that device does not denote itself as a child’s device in the first place. That’s only possible if the law isn’t hammering the OS into openly exposing its own user data to anyone that asks for it.

Your last point about personal responsibility is an important one. It’s why, if you happen to be using an old insecure device running Windows XP, you can toy around on the web with it, but you should disconnect it from your personal network, and should not enter personal info on it. Any device software that is forced to keep an open “Would_President_47_Seek_To_Rape_This_User” flag, available to every application, is removing that option for personal responsibility.

Does it even allow for user privacy protection? Nothing I’ve read of the bill suggests that an app could ask whether the user is of a fuckable class by its Epstein-list owners, and allow the user to block the prompt. Every other app has to ask for permission to use the camera, to write to certain directories, they can even be firewalled to prevent network access. The very idea that an OS must code in a form of user information that must be provided to any app, trusted or not, is a warped, Palantir-driven approach to (in)security.

Most practitioners of data security are aware of the severe dangers of fingerprinting users, and that is a hardline issue. Thus, in order to maintain their security practices, their only choice is to not collect this sort of info on users at any level. If they’re delivering a security product with a built-in vulnerability, they’re not delivering a security product. It’s much better to just surrender one state until it invents sanity.

Wake me when that actually leads to enforcement penalties. This law is vague enough as it is, no company is going to get slammed for “accidentally” skipping a user permission check, and having their FunPad app offer up your age info to one of Palantir’s long fingers.

Even entering DoB is imo too much of a privacy breach. In my view, they should just take the highest age bracket described, apparently 18+, and then ask that on OS installation: “Are you over the age of 18?” If the user says yes, it installs, and every app is hardcoded to receive that 18+ bracket when checking demographic. If they say no, then it simply replies that users under 18 may not install it under the laws of California.

The other solution I go for is library media, as well as finding competing streaming services like PBS’s. Just finished Fallout season one off a borrowed DVD.

Oh no! By posting a contentious opinion in this thread, you have introduced DRAMA. And no, you don’t get to point fingers; it’s still DRAMA that you’re at fault for!

See how easy that is?

Introducing a niche, unheard indie game by a small, unknown team: The Witcher 3!

I wouldn’t even agree with the idea that “Mobile is powering most of gaming’s growth”. Quite often, the two sectors have nothing to do with each other. For the most part, PC and console gaming has stagnated because the publishers controlling those spaces have flipped off their customers and given them nothing.

That’s what I saw out of it. Being attacked by non-zombies trying to rush you makes for an extremely disconcerting look. I can’t help but think the dev pictured themselves in that situation.