Just out of curiosity, do you think that licensing your posts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 makes it illegal to use them to train an AI? If so, why do you think that? I post GPL licensed code online, so I'm interested in this topic.
If you write code, you might be aware of the AI coding assistants out there. Most notable is probably Github's Copilot. Well, that AI assistant has an ongoing case against it to answer the question you're asking. So, just like you add a GPL (or other) license to your code, creative commons licenses are for text and media that aren't code and I add it to my comments.
Whether they will have an impact has yet to be determined, so we'll see if creative commons with a non-commercial clause is for naught or not.
How does Valve prevent you from controlling your own device? Their version of Linux isn't locked down, you can fully customize it like any Linux afaik.
Their system (and the Steam client) is proprietary, which means you can't easily see what the software does or change it. If you can't control the software then you don't control the device. People deserve to have the 4 essential freedoms. This is why Windows is bad and it's the same with SteamOS.
SteamOS is only bad when you expect it to support a variety of hardware. They promised to release it as a standalone and it's still not there yet, too bad.
You are correct about Steam client though. Even if they keep the internals closed, the GUI part alone would be worth forking. I wish a chrome-less version would exist.
Steam Deck is a computer, so its users deserve to have full control over it just like their PC or smartphone.
You are correct about Steam client though. Even if they keep the internals closed, the GUI part alone would be worth forking. I wish a chrome-less version would exist.
If people can't easily modify it, then its developers have power over users. You have to trust that they will not abuse that power, but they already do - with DRM for example.
Can you explain what parts of SteamOS are not controllable in a way that makes it more restricted than Arch, which it is based on?
Valve won't release the source code and I don't use it, so it's hard for me to tell which packages are proprietary and which are not. Steam client for sure is proprietary and it comes with the OS. Arch by default is Free Software (other than proprietary blobs in the kernel) and you can audit what each program does and modify it. With SteamOS you can't do that, because Valve keeps secrets from you on your own device.
[If the account owns the game - allow user to download and run the game] is a DRM sure… But it’s kind of fair, no?
To play any game you have to install and run the proprietary Steam client and be logged in to an account. Even to play singleplayer games. Even if you bought a physical disc. There are stores that don't do this: gog.com and itch.io. They provide an optional client for convenience, but you can just download a game's installer from the website and install it on any PC any time you want. In case of Itch the client is Free Software so anyone can see what it does and modify it.
That doesn't mean you can't control how it works. Most people don't need sources of their Linux distros to use them as they want. It would be cool to have the source, but you wouldn't expect them to have an official maintained repo since they spend much more resources on actual hardware that needs this distro.
Steam client for sure is proprietary and it comes with the OS
Yeah it seems to also be the only thing that is proprietary in SteamOS too.
To play any game you have to install and run the proprietary Steam client and be logged in to an account.
Are you clueless or what? There are too many ways to do what you want with SteamOS. You can use offline mode, desktop mode, play pirated games in any mode, install any controller software you like. Finally, install another Linux distro on it, or Windows. But people buy Deck because of SteamOS mostly since it creates the intended (and expected) experience.
Wanna know why we aren't seeing many enthusiasts creating more handheld frontends for platforms like Deck? Yeah, not at all because the platform is locked behind DRM or other bs. But because the best experience most people expect is already available and it becomes better with updates.
That doesn’t mean you can’t control how it works. Most people don’t need sources of their Linux distros to use them as they want.
You can't easily make changes to a program without the source code or even check what it does. Most people are not programmers, so others study the code and make the necessary changes for them.
It would be cool to have the source, but you wouldn’t expect them to have an official maintained repo since they spend much more resources on actual hardware that needs this distro.
This is not an excuse. What they are doing is unethical. They put themselves in a position of power over their users. Not much different from Microsoft or Apple.
Yeah it seems to also be the only thing that is proprietary in SteamOS too.
I don't know if that's true. But the Linux kernel is proprietary as well (just like the one in Arch) - it contains binary blobs without the source code.
Are you clueless or what? There are too many ways to do what you want with SteamOS. You can use offline mode, desktop mode, play pirated games in any mode, install any controller software you like.
I was explaining to you how DRM works and why it's wrong, since apparently you have no idea. I don't know why you are listing features that any popular desktop operating system has (even Windows). SteamOS is still proprietary, which makes it unethical.
Finally, install another Linux distro on it, or Windows. But people buy Deck because of SteamOS mostly since it creates the intended (and expected) experience.
If you buy a Windows laptop, you can install any operating system on it too. That doesn't make Windows ethical.
99% users won't ever need that. For cases when they do, they can find guides, modify settings or install software that does what they want.
This is not an excuse. What they are doing is unethical.
People don't need an excuse. They play their games and that's it.
it contains binary blobs without the source code
Any distro you download can do this exact thing and you wouldn't know for a long period, unless you spend enough time to compile the whole thing yourself, compare and research.
I was explaining to you how DRM works and why it's wrong
I consider myself knowledgeable but you surely chose a wrong example to teach people about DRM. Try some denuvo or eac maybe.
If you buy a Windows laptop, you can install any operating system on it too. That doesn't make Windows ethical.
Whatever that means, users don't care about it. Compared to others, Valve provides a lot more value in most of their solutions. They are hackable just enough to satisfy most enthusiasts.
99% users won’t ever need that. For cases when they do, they can find guides, modify settings or install software that does what they want.
You could make the same excuse for Windows.
Any distro you download can do this exact thing and you wouldn’t know for a long period, unless you spend enough time to compile the whole thing yourself, compare and research.
You don't have to compile to know this. You can find the list of fully free distros here: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html . Debian removes those blobs too, but it's not on that list for other reasons.
I consider myself knowledgeable but you surely chose a wrong example to teach people about DRM. Try some denuvo or eac maybe.
That's DRM too and there are many more examples. Blu-ray also contains DRM. And so do most PC games thanks to Valve. Console games on the other hand usually don't have DRM when you buy a physical copy.
Whatever that means, users don’t care about it. Compared to others, Valve provides a lot more value in most of their solutions. They are hackable just enough to satisfy most enthusiasts.
I know that most people don't care about their freedom, privacy or security. Most people use Windows. But this doesn't stop us from trying to build a better world for ourselves and to try to convince others to care.
The distros being removed from this list mostly by requests from maintainers means it's not actively monitored or researched at all. So by not verifying it you put yourself on a mercy of other people. It will fail, if not already.
Console games on the other hand usually don't have DRM when you buy a physical copy.
That's because you have to use consoles to even read them. They contain hardware DRM and are far from being ethical.
But this doesn't stop us from trying to build a better world for ourselves and to try to convince others to care.
Am I missing something or you're thinking that starting with least offenders is a good idea?
The distros being removed from this list mostly by requests from maintainers means it’s not actively monitored or researched at all. So by not verifying it you put yourself on a mercy of other people. It will fail, if not already.
What are you talking about? It's a list made by the Free Software Foundation. What was removed? If some information is incorrect, you should be able to prove it.
That’s because you have to use consoles to even read them. They contain hardware DRM and are far from being ethical.
I don't know what hardware DRM means, but they use proprietary software, so you are right that they are unethical. I never said they were.
Am I missing something or you’re thinking that starting with least offenders is a good idea?
It means hardware modules like chips containing the code that you'll have to do a lot of work to even dump, before trying to interpret and make use of it.
Physical games also mostly use storage that degrades over time and I consider it another form of DRM.
I don't know what you mean.
Why do you bash Valve but not any other company like Apple, Nvidia etc?
Steam (and other parts of SteamOS) is non free software, it can do anything on your system and there is no easy way for you to change that or even know what it does. Valve developers put themselves in a position of power over you. They keep secrets from you on your own device. This in itself is unethical, but they also abuse their users with DRM. How can you say that you have control in this case?
DRM is what publishers and developers want. If Valve didn't have DRM they wouldn't be anywhere near as big as they are today. The influx of developers happened when Steam released their DRM for the public.
They are DRM-free. I can send you a copy of those games and you can run them on your computer. Without you having to log in anywhere or install an additional proprietary application. Without anyone verifying anything. Isn't that amazing?
By that definition Steam is DRM free too. I can download tons of my games, pack and send them to you and they'll work. My rough estimate is that about half of all games are like that. Half of the remaining games rely on Steam environment for community or multiplayer functionality.
Some games on Steam are DRM-free and you can play them without running Steam. That is good, but you still need the proprietary Steam client to download them and Steam doesn't tell you which games have DRM before you buy them. gog.com and itch.io prove that this can be done better.
I don’t know the anime either, but the steam logo is walking away from the debian logo and then staring into the eyes of the arch logo. OP is saying that valve made the right choice by ditching debian (I thought they were using ubuntu, but that’s just a debian derivative with a bad UI on top) for arch as the basis for steamOS. For a gaming platform, I agree. You want the latest updates and software versions for gaming purposes (and proton/wine purposes), and they can hire employees to ensure they have tackled arch’s bleeding-edge instabilities before rolling the updates out to the general population.
Nah you're overthinking it. Grab a beginner friendly distro like Mint and just start using it. All this is fanboy talk that can be interesting but doesn't affect 99% of users.
