tal

joined 2 years ago
[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I don't know enough about German domestic politics to understand the full impact, though my memory is that Merz is considered to be more-economically-liberal than Söder.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I guess the Kremlin thinks that it's a soft power concern (subversive Western ideas in front of our children's eyeballs), but in all seriousness, this seems way down on the list of things that I'd be worried about if I were them.

  • In terms of exposure to a domestic audience, consoles are closed platforms. They can probably mostly restrict creation and sale of Russian-language content that they find politically-objectionable. That's probably a lot easier and cheaper than trying to produce a new state-subsidized console.

  • Scale matters here. China hasn't done this. If China hasn't done it, I doubt that it's gonna go well for Russia.

  • This is gonna drag people off projects that they're actually gonna need more in terms of import substitution. I mean, direct military stuff aside, your whole economy is gonna have problems with lack of access to stuff from outside.

  • Consoles have a relatively-low gaming marketshare today, due to mobile. They're probably globally the least-important.

  • Of all of the gaming platforms out there, PC, console, and mobile, consoles are the least-useful in terms of non-game applications. If Russia wants to be a player in one of those, consoles would be the last I'd choose. It'd probably be easier to just ban consoles in Russia, if necessary.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

This seems like an odd medium to make that complaint in; while technically lemmy exposes upvotes to other instances, so it's not really private, the client doesn't, by default, permit upvotes to be seen.

Kbin/mbin does expose upvotes; here's the upvotes on this post, for example:

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Indian English is closer to British English than American English, so if you specifically want it to be in Indian English but don't know that yourself, I'd use British English.

But unless you have some special reason to believe that it's important, I don't think it really matters. All of the forms are pretty understandable by everyone else. I can tell that someone using British English isn't from here in the US, but it's not really an understandability problem. Long term, my guess is that they'll just blend together due to international interchange anyway.

Maybe if you're a professional journalist in the US and the publication you work at has specified American English in their style guide, they might care about your ability to specifically do that, but I can't believe that there are many positions that would. I've worked with people who use British English on the job in the US.

The only specifically-Indian English word that isn't present in other forms of English that I can think of off the top of my head is "prepone" -- that is, to move to an earlier time. It's a riff off "postpone", to move to a later time.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago

Yeah, but that's not why it's being used by those instances.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm sure that a DisplayPort device in a chain can also inject video, but I have to admit that I would kind of like to not have two competing video standards, and my impression is that DisplayPort tends to lead HDMI technically, so...

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I guess it can notify you via your cell phone when a load is done. I could see that having value.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I mean, XMPP did get uptake. Google Talk used federated XMPP at one point in time. But...there's not much money for a service provider in an open, competitive market. If you can get enough users, you want to put up walls, leverage network effect. Then you get to have a monopoly on access to your users, and there's more money to be had. So there's always going to be people trying to get everyone into a single provider.

I think that with email, the magic factor was that there was no one entity large enough to pull that off at the time that email became common. Today, there are actually startlingly few email service providers of the "pay me a fee, I give you a couple mailboxes" variety -- I was amazed when I went looking this year. I'm wondering whether email might become a walled garden before messaging stops being a walled garden.

view more: ‹ prev next ›