Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Yes. They can now brick your physical device. It is something they can now do. Brick the entire thing. That was the point of this post, and you said "no it's just online service stuff." My whole point was saying that's not true. They can now brick your Nintendo Switch if you mod it. It's not a thing the CAN do. I'm glad we finally agree.
No, Bricking would be rendering the firmware useless. It has a definition and this is not it. Rendering the Switch unable to play games, does not make it a brick. Definitions matter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brick_(electronics)
Banning you from using their online service, does not make the Switch a brick, as the firmware still functions as intended.
So now, you're arguing over a "What if" -- AND you're getting definitions completely wrong, resulting in the spread of misinformation.
What part of wholey disable the device isn't clicking. They can wipe the firmware. Also bricking is used in a lot of ways, but even this they can do.
This isn't banning from online service..... Did you even read what I quoted about hardware?
No company in the history of electronics has ever been in the habit of remotely bricking devices, get real.
And yes, I've read it - ON TOP of that, I'm familiar with these types of clauses in a real world basis. Let me tell you, you're off in lala land with your interpretation.
You seem to be doing everything to ignore the fact that they now have the right and ability to do it. Which is all that was being said and you disagreed with.
I don't care about what usually happens. We usually don't pay for the tutorial to a new system either, but here we are. Things change.
Ok, what part am I misunderstanding about being able to disable the hardware in part or whole? How does being able to make the "Nintendo device permanently unusable in whole or in part" not allow them to brick it? I'm hoping with a real world basis it will be easy.
Edit: Stumbled across this funny enough. https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/pc-gaming-remains-undefeated-nintendo-now-says-it-has-the-right-to-brick-your-switch-if-it-thinks-youre-pirating-games-or-modifying-the-console/