You absolutely can move the thing without cutting it down. It just happens to be quicker to cut them down and most of the people doing this don’t care about the charge.

But I do take your meaning and to some extent even agree with it.

Reading comprehension doesn’t seem to be your strong suit.

A lawyer worth their salt should absolutely defend you against a vandalism charge if by the lawful definition no vandalism took place.

Not only that, but a lawyer’s job is to make sure the law is followed during legal proceedings. Meaning they are supposed to defend your right to a lawfully handled trial which would include dismissing charges that didn’t fit the crime committed.

This is criminal mischief. That’s a misdemeanor (just like vandalism).

Theft involves legally speaking an “intent to deprive the owner of their property”.

Flock owns the cameras. It’s a subscription model where the municipality actually leases the camera and “retains ownership” of the footage/data the collect.

So by rights the CEO having them dropped off on his property could be considered the same as them being returned to the owner.

You can take that however you want. But vandalism has a specific legal definition.

No. I did not. Relocation of the asset to the owners property means there’s no intent to deprive the owner of said property which means that it’s not theft.

The property has not been defaced, damaged, or destroyed so that means there’s no intent of vandalism. Therefore vandalism did not take place.

What you’re describing is criminal mischief, which I would agree this is.

I made a singular allowance in the case that the pole was cut (which counts as damage), rather than being dug up (which wouldn’t), which you appear to have ignored.

If you don’t like facts, that is a you problem.

You are welcome to kagi or whatever this yourself to see what I’m talking about instead of doubling down.

If you are incapable of that, don’t bother to respond to me.

Nice downvote.

You didn’t look up the legal definition of anything before you posted this nonsense. Have a good day.

Technically not theft. Technically not vandalism.

“Vandalism refers to the intentional destruction or defacement of property”

They relocated the item to its owners house. At best the cutting might be vandalism but you don’t have to cut them down. That just happens to be quicker.

My brother in Christ, the hole in the ozone layer fixed itself because we as a race decided to listen to scientists and ban the shit causing it pretty much world wide. A full on concerted effort backed by science. What the fuck.

Depends on the definition of “work”. There’s plenty of people I had on Facebook that I no longer talk to because I don’t use Facebook. To be clear, my Facebook still exists. It’s there to face tank all the family photos my MIL shares. That’s the only reason the account still exists at all.

That’s technically working for me.

But lots of people are just addicted and Facebook or insta or messenger scratches an itch for them.

They think it will blow over because so many consumers have short memories when it comes to bad press.

The problem is, the press keeps on coming and so people keep being reminded they’re up to no good. Keeping AI in the news cycle isn’t helping them win over people who are increasingly dissatisfied with it.

They can absolutely make it so that disk won’t load the game though so long as you’re connected to the internet.

Pretty much all software EULA’s are like this. Anything you “buy a license for” certainly. Same as it ever was.

Good news, you can opt out of Netflix entirely. The dark side has a flag and shanties and everything.

Lol, no.

This is absolutely subjective. Assets flips could count, but I’ve played and enjoyed several of those. Flappy Bird style games kind of fall into this category.

This is subjective. Just because a full grown adult with different tastes doesn’t like something doesn’t mean it’s shovelware. A 5 year old kid might love it.

But, here’s a better question. How much does it cost to moderate a platform with that many games?

Because they do moderate the platform just not in a way you like.

Literally in this comments section there’s someone else talking about how they delist or de-prioritize games that don’t get good feedback. You just want them to not allow those games at all.

The game Horses was moderated off the platform. You just want moderation to fit your specific model that you made up in your head.

What does terrorism curry taste like?

Would a decentralized version of Steam do that?

Is that 30% the bulk of Valve’s profit?

What do Indie developers get in exchange for Valve’s 30% cut on Steam that they don’t get elsewhere that charges 30% or charges less of a percentage?

So could physical retailers, so how’s that working out?

I’m not going to say they can’t do that. It’s not a bad suggestion but it seems to be suggested continually in a vacuum without considering other factors.

Yes. But it is likely that the seller made such upgrades based in the spec sheet provided by the company on question (either Best Buy or the manufacturer) and in either case someone is liable for that spec sheet being wrong and it promoting the purchase of said laptop.

Ok. So what percentage of the games launched on steam are shovelware vs quality indie games. And where is that line? And who makes that decision?

The main problem I see with this is that game devs are trying to use capitalism to make money. So what you’re saying is, it’s alright for game devs, but not for store fronts.

That doesn’t make sense to me.

Additionally though, of the major gaming retailers, Valve has the least predatory model (I’m not counting smaller game retailers in this because we need to be honest about the fact that they aren’t competing in the market with Valve as far as what they offer devs).

Did you take into account the reasons that game devs choose Valve over other retailers like GOG? Or the fact that very often game devs will use Valve, GOG and other gaming retailers?

You didn’t give any specifics in your answer to me and honestly I have to wonder if you even know where the majority of Valves money comes from.

Follow-up question.

How does the consumer benefit from and why should they switch to a different retailer than Valve’s Steam? What is the benefit of a fediverse style retailer and how does it work?

I believe that this is as much about game quality, over saturation, and marketing/inertia as it is about Valve in general, but I’m trying to understand what they think (based on the contents of the article) can be done to fix this problem for game devs.

It’s a bailout for life. It’s use bailing out every year for the rest of time. It’s still a bailout but it’s not a one time thing.