3 ms·

What people keep failing to understand about Stop Killing Games is that the proposal is intentionally vague and doesn't fully specify its demands. The intent is

What people keep failing to understand about Stop Killing Games is that the proposal is intentionally vague and doesn't fully specify its demands. The intent is to open a conversation, not think through every corner case. Of course, the logical minds here will want to tear it apart and analyze it from every direction, but don't forget that it still needs to be "transformed" into an actual non-vague version. Part of me worries it'll get transformed into some onerous GDPR-style law that just adds a new annoying banner when you install a game that warns you that you accept whatever end of life plan the game has, which no one will read...

gond 1y ago
I think we won’t have to endure that again. Contrary to popular belief, the EU organs are able to learn. About half a year ago, I read statements of members which, if one would translate the political jargon, would amount to: “We haven’t foreseen such a blatant misuse of the law. These banners should never have happened and we would not have dreamed that corporations would shift the burden to the user. We are, in fact, quite furious about the whole thing.”
- phendrenad2 1y ago
  Interesting. But I don't think they have learned much if they think being really angry about it will help.
  - gond 1y ago
    Are you saying that if some person is making a mistake, is angry about making the mistake at all, that this person will just happily do the mistake again because being angry about one’s own mistake is such a beautiful state of mind? I am unsure of how your mental model of ‘error correction’ is working without starting at the point of recognising an error in the first place - just deliberately ignoring for a moment whatever you emotionally might attach to it. I would say the just checked the fist step with bravery by openly admitting the mistake.
    - phendrenad2 1y ago
      Fair enough, getting mad is maybe the first step. Whenever person A tries to influence person B to act a certain way, and it backfires spectacularly, person A may be initially angry before realizing the blame is their own.

gond 1y ago

I think we won’t have to endure that again. Contrary to popular belief, the EU organs are able to learn. About half a year ago, I read statements of members which, if one would translate the political jargon, would amount to: “We haven’t foreseen such a blatant misuse of the law. These banners should never have happened and we would not have dreamed that corporations would shift the burden to the user. We are, in fact, quite furious about the whole thing.”

phendrenad2 1y ago
Interesting. But I don't think they have learned much if they think being really angry about it will help.
- gond 1y ago
  Are you saying that if some person is making a mistake, is angry about making the mistake at all, that this person will just happily do the mistake again because being angry about one’s own mistake is such a beautiful state of mind? I am unsure of how your mental model of ‘error correction’ is working without starting at the point of recognising an error in the first place - just deliberately ignoring for a moment whatever you emotionally might attach to it. I would say the just checked the fist step with bravery by openly admitting the mistake.
  - phendrenad2 1y ago
    Fair enough, getting mad is maybe the first step. Whenever person A tries to influence person B to act a certain way, and it backfires spectacularly, person A may be initially angry before realizing the blame is their own.