this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
536 points (99.3% liked)

News

39046 readers
2157 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

With the end of physical PlayStation games looming, the need for clear digital ownership rights is more pressing than ever.

For its part, Sony believes your rights are very clear: you do not own your digital games, and it's unlikely you're stupid enough to believe otherwise. At least, that's roughly the argument the company's lawyers are presenting in response to a proposed class-action lawsuit.

Sony argues that its current customer-facing disclosures ensure that "reasonable consumers would not be misled" into believing they actually own their digital games. That's according to a Game File report (paid article link) citing an August 21 filing Sony's lawyers made in California's Northern District.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ExperimentalGuy@programming.dev 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

People are too inundated with what the newest Thing™ is to actually give a shit about living conditions, it seems like. Deep rooted and normalized conservatism about how things are seems to be most people's modus operandi.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I mean do you care? It sounds like you do. That's one people right there. So do i. That's makes at least two of us.

I'm sure there are enough to cause a stink if we drop this defeatism and start with ourselves

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

This is just the collective action problem in miniature. There's a thousand different versions of this. It's exhausting to care about each individual issue so everyone winds up voting for shit they don't really want with their wallets. And some are oblivious to the problems and don't read the news or care enough for it to effect them.

The better and likely harder thing is to change our politics. With decent governance, the corporations that do this shit would face real consequences. Government corruption be it in the name of "deregulation" or "free markets" or whatever is the problem.

Our regulators and regulations are toothless, and so we live locked inside a scam society.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I kind of don't believe in a big "the problem" at least not in a totalizing way, especially if it's a problem so big people can't have any impact on it. I feel like there are a thousand of these battlefields, in our personal relationships, working life, civic life, consumer relationships.

I'm not saying tackling your big the problem wouldn't be a huge help across the board, but we'd still have other problems. Hell maybe some problems are just part of human nature and will be with us forever.

In any case, even if there is one big huge ur-problem from which all problems spread like tentacles we can each only act on an I individual level, so I believe all change starts there—it can't end there, but there it starts, and from there branches into collective action against the bigger problems in the world.

Does that make sense? I'm not meaning it in a contradictory way. But that negating the importance of individual action can actually disempower people from taking their part in collective action. Like it never gets off the ground because every individual just goes "well I'm just one person, so..."

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

But that negating the importance of individual action can actually disempower people from taking their part in collective action. Like it never gets off the ground because every individual just goes “well I’m just one person, so…”

Everyone pushes that viewpoint. What's the real choice here? Let's just look at this individual issue and pretend it's not connected to a larger problem of our government being endlessly corrupt and complicit in the non-stop caveat emptor that pervades everything. The choice is don't buy the fun toy while all of your friends do and every time they talk about the fun toy being fun you either relate to them less or actively become the debby downer that lectures everyone about why you didn't buy the fun toy.

I guess that was even kind of abstract, but if you're a gamer and are friends with other gamers they will likely buy this game and play it without you. They'll have fun playing it without you, and you get the great choice of saying "no i haven't bought that yet" and being vague and missing out, or lecturing them and risk being categorized as a negative nancy.

Either way your individual choice does little to solve the problem, because other individuals individually ignore it. And honestly, owning games is somewhat inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

You aren't individually choosing your way out of these things. Other people exist. And unless you're Elon fucking Musk, your individual preferences will likely not move the needle.

The only real answers are not individual choices and nagging. They're collectivism and politics. Sorry for the inconvenience but it's true.

The people opposing you understand this. It's why Sony is a corporation. It's why Republicans need megachurches. Collectivism is the only thing that works.

Edit: Look man I'm here on lemmy and never use Reddit. Reddit still exists. My individual choices do not move the needle.

[–] spy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

If there's a new game, we gotta buy it. I want fifa 2027, it will bring me so much satisfaction over fifa 2026.

Ohhh new ps6 pro? Which is better than my 1000 bucks brand new ps6? We gotta buy it.

/s

Sure, we have to enjoy something and spend some money but I can't fathom how people keep spending like that.

I think I never purchased any new new device or game less than 4 years before my last purchase of an older device or game of the same type. And some have lasted 10 years, or even more, for an e-reader.

I may be wrong about games but can't think of one atm.

I think part of the blame is Google's, even before they turned evil: our average attention span is fucking low, and we only want instant gratification now. We used to need to read, to explore in games, to fail and try again before beating the game, before knowing the answer to something, and then suddenly we could magically get the answers we seeked in a matter of seconds.

It feels to me like speedrunners and challenge-runners of retro games show us how things can be enjoyed way more than just the first playthrough or the second.

They're enjoying the hell out of a good game, even if old, while most others are seeking the dopamine of new and mostly ephemeral shit.

I am not part of either group, but I want to be part of the first, in some ways, and never the second.