cmhe

joined 2 years ago
[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Hmm... I always thought that the goal of consoles is to provide fewer options. You don't need to choose which components you want, you just buy the one and only box offered by the company.

And then there are the exclusives, where you also, as someone buying a different box, didn't get the choice to buy the game released for another box. And generally have fewer games to play.

Then there are the (online) shops, where, as a console player, you either have no choices or fewer.

Then there is multiplayer, where with a console you cannot use other services, and even have to pay for it.

And modding, which is also pretty limited on console, and you generally don't have the tools to create mods yourself to customize your gaming experience.

So... All in all, I thought the main 'advantage' of consoles is that you don't need to make so many choices, because making decisions is hard. But that comes at a cost, lower entry cost (hardware), but higher operating cost (games, online play).

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Don't worry, review was done by an LLM as well. ;)

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

privacy guarantees

security guarantees, not privacy guarantees.

With root you can actually control what kind of things each app does and stores, and check what data it transmits to remote servers. But it also breaks/weakens the android security model, where apps can do, store or transmit stuff protected from the eyes of the user of the phone.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I've been using Linux since IDK over 25 years. But I have multiple devices and frequently distro hop. Currently, Bazzite on SteamDeck, a CachyOS upgraded from an Archlinux on Laptop, Fedora Kinolite on a different one and a tablet, QubesOS on a third, OpenSuse MicroOS on a container host, Debian on a Server and another container host, Archlinux on another server, bunch of OpenWrts on routers and switches, NixOS on some RaspberryPies and a build server, some Debian based Proxmox PVE systems...

So... I guess I'm just confused on my identity on that pipeline.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Kurzum: Erst wenn Sie mit der Ware an die Kasse gehen und eine eindeutige Kaufabsicht mit Preisvorstellung abgeben, entscheidet sich, ob Sie den Artikel auch wirklich zu diesem Preis erhalten. Sie haben kein Recht, den angegebenen Preis einzufordern.

In short: Only when you take the goods to the checkout and express a clear intention to purchase at the asking price will it be decided whether you will actually receive the item at that price. You have no right to demand the stated price.

https://www.focus.de/immobilien/wohnen/falsche-preisauszeichnung-muessen-sie-trotzdem-den-richtigen-preis-zahlen_a0f9868d-30c0-45f0-b25e-27893a11b914.html

To me, that the price label is accidental wrong doesn't really matter.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

I'm not sure there is a difference between those things in the German law.

As I said, in Germany the price tag is a mere price suggestion, the final offer and transaction happens on checkout.

In my case it was an electronic article, where the price tag showed a much lower price and the cashier then demanded much more. But it turned out that they can do that.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Well... In Germany apparently they can.

The price tag is not binding, it is a mere price suggestion. The final price is the one when you actually buy it at the checkout.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Haggling is legal in Germany. The cashier is making the offer.

Wherever it is discrimination or not would probably depend on the metrics used to decide the price.

If someone is really desperate for an article, then I could imagine that the cashier can raise the price.

But I am not a lawer. This is just my assumptions on how it could be implemented.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

And if they do it on an individual basis.

Like do they detect that a shopper is in a hurry, or if they just need one more ingredient for their cake so they are willing to pay more.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Sure... If you even notice it. And if enough people will care and if there are still stores around that don't do that, clearly superior profit maximising scheme.

I'd rather want this stuff to become illegal. So calling your representatives, make news and go to the streets about this would I think help more that yet another boycott.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

Issue is that haggling is actually legal in many countries.

So at the cashier they will make you an offer, which, if you pay, accept.

Now with technical support making individual offers becomes pretty easy and effordless on their end, but if you are in a hurry you don't have that technical support to make a counter offer that effordless... So the shopper is at an disadvantage. Either way, your reaction, wherever you buy or not will train the AI of the store to extract the maximum amount of money of the broad customer base. If some people are priced out of living, they probably don't care.

view more: next ›