5 ms·

Do you mean the pop-up ads when you start Steam? You can turn those off under Settings->Interface->Notify me.

by stickmangallows 12y ago

tempodox 12y ago
Thanks, I hadn't found that yet. Then again, I didn't look that hard, either...
- Arzh 12y ago
  Also they add a lot of cool features to the updates, especially if you are in the beta program. They just recently added the ability to cap the download rate and allow for downloading while playing a game, both really great features. I'm not anti-DRM, I'm just anti-BAD-DRM (ubisoft comes to mind.) Steam's is a perfectly effective level of DRM for me.
  - shmerl 12y ago
    > I'm not anti-DRM, I'm just anti-BAD-DRM This sounds like a faulty logic to me. Being anti DRM on the basis of comfort seriously misses the point. Because DRM can't be good. It can be comfortable enough to ignore though, and that's actually a problem.
    - horseemergency 12y ago
      How is that faulty logic? You can take the stance that DRM is a good thing if it's protecting creators' rights and doesn't get in the way of consumers using the product. I'd argue that most creators take this stance, because they want to get paid for the stuff they made so they can turn around and make more stuff. Or you can take the stance that "DRM can't be good", because reasons. This is the stance that a lot of people take who don't create (or who aren't paying the bills by creating). Personally I'm somewhere in the middle, but I see the validity of both sides. Creators want to get paid, and consumers don't want to be told how/when to use the things they own. Being anti-BAD-DRM is taking that middle ground, and in terms of Steam they're doing it pretty well.
      - shmerl 12y ago
        The problem with such approach is that it ignores the root of the issue - the unethical nature of DRM. I.e. to draw an analogy, imagine someone objecting to the police state methodology not on the grounds that it's evil and abusive, but on the grounds of discomfort of such invasion. By that logic, if police state would employ covert methods, that would be acceptable since it doesn't disturb one's comfort. I think such logic is pretty flawed. > you can take the stance that "DRM can't be good", because reasons. This is the stance that a lot of people take who don't create No, it's the stance of anyone with common sense. Those who create including. Examples: * http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/cory-doctorow/article/50413-with-a-little-help-digital-lysenkoism.html http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blog... * http://brutalgamer.com/2012/03/09/cd-project-red-drm-no-longer/ http://brutalgamer.com/2012/03/09/cd-project-red-drm-no-long... * http://www.lexi-alexander.com/blog/2014/6/1/will-the-real-pirates-please-stand-up http://www.lexi-alexander.com/blog/2014/6/1/will-the-real-pi...
        lclarkmichalek 12y ago
        If you don't believe DRM to be unethical, then surely it's perfectly consistent? You're argument seems to require DRM to be unethical a priori
        shmerl 12y ago
        No, even if one assumes DRM not to be unethical, one can observe that DRM is nonsensical from the practical standpoint. I.e. because not only it doesn't reduce piracy while punishing only legitimate users, it even induces piracy! (See second and third links above).
        Arainach 12y ago
        Does it, though? Even if you can't eliminate something, making it prohibitively difficult has an impact. In my younger days, at LAN parties where people could just pass around the installer of a game almost no one bought most of the games. As it became more and more difficult to find reliable sources of cracks/installers, the ratio of people deciding to purchase rather than put up with the hassle increased. Even if you CAN get a free version if you try hard enough, the level of trying required will cause more and more people to find it worth the purchase.
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      Because DRM can't be good. This is a philosophical position, not an infallible universal truth. The problem with DRM, in general, boiled down to it's most salient point, is that it destroys value. It gets in your way, treats you like a criminal, and generally makes your life miserable so the people who made the attached product can feel like they're flipping off those eeeevul pirates. Every system I can think of meets that definition, with one exception: Steam. What's the benefit to me of SecuRom? There isn't one. What't the benefit to me of Steam? I get all my games in one place, my save files synchronized across an unlimited number of machines, user-generated DLC automatically brought in (and synchronized the same way), in-home streaming, library sharing, the whole social network, in game overlay providing same and web access, some unheard-of-elsewhere sales, and quite a lot more. What's more, if despite all of that you're still not interested and would prefer to go back to the dark ages, Steamworks is trivially defeated with an emulator program.
      - shmerl 12y ago
        > This is a philosophical position, not an infallible universal truth. Not more than the claim that police state is evil. We aren't talking about moral relativity here however. > The problem with DRM, in general, boiled down to it's most salient point, is that it destroys value. Somehow ethical problems of DRM you try to devalue, while practical problems of DRM (like being infective against piracy and punishing legitimate users) you promote as the main issue with it. I don't think that's proper. However both are enough of a reason to never use DRM. > What't the benefit to me of Steam? I get all my games in one place, my save files synchronized across an unlimited number of machines Benefits of Steam have nothing to do with it having DRM. They could all be provided in a DRM-free fashion. Yet they chose not to.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        We are talking about why your moral stance should be applicable to me, complete with comparisons to a police state (of all things..) You haven't convinced me yet. The fact that you feel there are ethical problems is again a philosophical position.
- pdpi 12y ago
  It's pretty telling that your threshold for bitching about something on HN is lower than your threshold for trying to solve it.
  - theandrewbailey 12y ago
    It proves that people are more willing to play a massively multiplayer typing game than a point-and-click adventure.
    - shmerl 12y ago
      GOG also assumed that, and made a mistake delaying the release of the much awaited Divinity Original Sin, because they weren't ready with multiplayer support in their Galaxy. A lot of users were quite upset, and GOG rushed to release the version with single player only as a first step. They also publicly admitted the mistake. Not many companies do that.
  - patmcguire 12y ago
    You've always been able to turn Clippy off. You've always been able to go through twelve screens of settings and figure out which Facebook radio buttons are the "don't share everything" option. You've always been able to opt out of spamming all your email contacts when you import from LinkedIn. You've always been able to cancel your recurring subscriptions, you've just got to call our customer support number, no it absolutely cannot be done online. Super obnoxious defaults are still super obnoxious if they can be changed. I've used Steam for a while, and don't mind the ads that much, but it would never would have occurred to me that I had the option to turn them off.
    - Lockyy 12y ago
      Have you considered that for a lot of people the ads aren't obnoxious because they actually help keep them up to date on new releases?
      - arg01 12y ago
Natsu 12y ago
I never expected there to be a setting to turn those off so I never looked for one. Thanks!
partomniscient 12y ago
Except it's a setting with what one might consider 'shitty bundling tactics': i.e. "Notify me about additions or changes to my games, new releases, and upcoming releases." I only want the setting to apply up to the first comma.

Do you mean the pop-up ads when you start Steam? You can turn those off under Settings->Interface->Notify me.

tempodox 12y ago

Thanks, I hadn't found that yet. Then again, I didn't look that hard, either...

Arzh 12y ago
Also they add a lot of cool features to the updates, especially if you are in the beta program. They just recently added the ability to cap the download rate and allow for downloading while playing a game, both really great features. I'm not anti-DRM, I'm just anti-BAD-DRM (ubisoft comes to mind.) Steam's is a perfectly effective level of DRM for me.
- shmerl 12y ago
  > I'm not anti-DRM, I'm just anti-BAD-DRM This sounds like a faulty logic to me. Being anti DRM on the basis of comfort seriously misses the point. Because DRM can't be good. It can be comfortable enough to ignore though, and that's actually a problem.
  - horseemergency 12y ago
    How is that faulty logic? You can take the stance that DRM is a good thing if it's protecting creators' rights and doesn't get in the way of consumers using the product. I'd argue that most creators take this stance, because they want to get paid for the stuff they made so they can turn around and make more stuff. Or you can take the stance that "DRM can't be good", because reasons. This is the stance that a lot of people take who don't create (or who aren't paying the bills by creating). Personally I'm somewhere in the middle, but I see the validity of both sides. Creators want to get paid, and consumers don't want to be told how/when to use the things they own. Being anti-BAD-DRM is taking that middle ground, and in terms of Steam they're doing it pretty well.
    - shmerl 12y ago
      The problem with such approach is that it ignores the root of the issue - the unethical nature of DRM. I.e. to draw an analogy, imagine someone objecting to the police state methodology not on the grounds that it's evil and abusive, but on the grounds of discomfort of such invasion. By that logic, if police state would employ covert methods, that would be acceptable since it doesn't disturb one's comfort. I think such logic is pretty flawed. > you can take the stance that "DRM can't be good", because reasons. This is the stance that a lot of people take who don't create No, it's the stance of anyone with common sense. Those who create including. Examples: * http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/cory-doctorow/article/50413-with-a-little-help-digital-lysenkoism.html http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blog... * http://brutalgamer.com/2012/03/09/cd-project-red-drm-no-longer/ http://brutalgamer.com/2012/03/09/cd-project-red-drm-no-long... * http://www.lexi-alexander.com/blog/2014/6/1/will-the-real-pirates-please-stand-up http://www.lexi-alexander.com/blog/2014/6/1/will-the-real-pi...
      - lclarkmichalek 12y ago
        If you don't believe DRM to be unethical, then surely it's perfectly consistent? You're argument seems to require DRM to be unethical a priori
        shmerl 12y ago
        No, even if one assumes DRM not to be unethical, one can observe that DRM is nonsensical from the practical standpoint. I.e. because not only it doesn't reduce piracy while punishing only legitimate users, it even induces piracy! (See second and third links above).
        Arainach 12y ago
        Does it, though? Even if you can't eliminate something, making it prohibitively difficult has an impact. In my younger days, at LAN parties where people could just pass around the installer of a game almost no one bought most of the games. As it became more and more difficult to find reliable sources of cracks/installers, the ratio of people deciding to purchase rather than put up with the hassle increased. Even if you CAN get a free version if you try hard enough, the level of trying required will cause more and more people to find it worth the purchase.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    Because DRM can't be good. This is a philosophical position, not an infallible universal truth. The problem with DRM, in general, boiled down to it's most salient point, is that it destroys value. It gets in your way, treats you like a criminal, and generally makes your life miserable so the people who made the attached product can feel like they're flipping off those eeeevul pirates. Every system I can think of meets that definition, with one exception: Steam. What's the benefit to me of SecuRom? There isn't one. What't the benefit to me of Steam? I get all my games in one place, my save files synchronized across an unlimited number of machines, user-generated DLC automatically brought in (and synchronized the same way), in-home streaming, library sharing, the whole social network, in game overlay providing same and web access, some unheard-of-elsewhere sales, and quite a lot more. What's more, if despite all of that you're still not interested and would prefer to go back to the dark ages, Steamworks is trivially defeated with an emulator program.
    - shmerl 12y ago
      > This is a philosophical position, not an infallible universal truth. Not more than the claim that police state is evil. We aren't talking about moral relativity here however. > The problem with DRM, in general, boiled down to it's most salient point, is that it destroys value. Somehow ethical problems of DRM you try to devalue, while practical problems of DRM (like being infective against piracy and punishing legitimate users) you promote as the main issue with it. I don't think that's proper. However both are enough of a reason to never use DRM. > What't the benefit to me of Steam? I get all my games in one place, my save files synchronized across an unlimited number of machines Benefits of Steam have nothing to do with it having DRM. They could all be provided in a DRM-free fashion. Yet they chose not to.
      - Karunamon 12y ago
        We are talking about why your moral stance should be applicable to me, complete with comparisons to a police state (of all things..) You haven't convinced me yet. The fact that you feel there are ethical problems is again a philosophical position.
pdpi 12y ago
It's pretty telling that your threshold for bitching about something on HN is lower than your threshold for trying to solve it.
- theandrewbailey 12y ago
  It proves that people are more willing to play a massively multiplayer typing game than a point-and-click adventure.
  - shmerl 12y ago
    GOG also assumed that, and made a mistake delaying the release of the much awaited Divinity Original Sin, because they weren't ready with multiplayer support in their Galaxy. A lot of users were quite upset, and GOG rushed to release the version with single player only as a first step. They also publicly admitted the mistake. Not many companies do that.
- patmcguire 12y ago
  You've always been able to turn Clippy off. You've always been able to go through twelve screens of settings and figure out which Facebook radio buttons are the "don't share everything" option. You've always been able to opt out of spamming all your email contacts when you import from LinkedIn. You've always been able to cancel your recurring subscriptions, you've just got to call our customer support number, no it absolutely cannot be done online. Super obnoxious defaults are still super obnoxious if they can be changed. I've used Steam for a while, and don't mind the ads that much, but it would never would have occurred to me that I had the option to turn them off.
  - Lockyy 12y ago
    Have you considered that for a lot of people the ads aren't obnoxious because they actually help keep them up to date on new releases?
    - arg01 12y ago

Natsu 12y ago

I never expected there to be a setting to turn those off so I never looked for one. Thanks!

partomniscient 12y ago

Except it's a setting with what one might consider 'shitty bundling tactics': i.e. "Notify me about additions or changes to my games, new releases, and upcoming releases." I only want the setting to apply up to the first comma.