> However, someone reportedly hijacked the developer’s Steam account and quickly transformed it into Beyond The Dark – changing its name, screenshots, and other store details. As Steam does not fully verify every patch made to a game, the modified version was reportedly able to go live without raising immediate red flags.
It is interesting that it seems to easier to take over a legit game than trying to create a new one. I have seen this with youtube channels, inactive during a long period of time and suddenly showing mostly scams. Or the original owner became a criminal, or more probably were taken over criminals.
> The malware allegedly searched for cryptocurrency wallet browser extensions, including MetaMask, before connecting to external servers and downloading additional tools. These tools were reportedly capable of stealing browser information, passwords, and cryptocurrency wallet data.
Cryptocurrencies are the most insecure currency that we have even invented. It is paradoxical that is being marketed as actually safe.
Now it makes sense why someone in a game development group mentioned he received an offer of $100 USD for his indie game. The buyer plainly stated that they were specifically looking to buy underperforming games. The developer didn't sell, but sadly $100 was more than he made in sales a year after launch, so it must have been tempting.
Maybe that's why they changed the game's name post-malware, to spam, er "promote" it as a new one and gain users quickly.
It would be easier to recommend the agent to buy tickets for a concert, or send a present. No so directly useful, but it seems that big tech thinks that it is a great idea to give agents that kind of access.
> It’s not like you’re not buying things linked to Saudi Arabia or UAE for lack of human rights.
The fact that these criminals are embedded so deeply in our society is a reason to fight against them even harder. They are corrupting politics, they are corrupting the economy, they are pushing for lower salaries and less rights for the working class across the globe. They can be stopped and should be stopped.
One does not stop fighting cancer just because it has spread out.
> only the large corporations can make money from content.
It is an aristocratic tax. Nobility has the right to profit on everything that the peasants produce. The peasants can keep enough to survive, everything else should be extracted.
The middle ages didnt happen because people was stupid but because there is a pressure for the money elite to extract as much value as possible. Democracy was designed to control that bad outcome, but the new aristocracy (billionaires, CEOs, etc.) is trying to kill democracy for good.
If the average working class Joe wants to have something more than scraps we are going to need to take power back and fix democracy.
> Nobody is even trying to make the trust better either which is odd.
The average working class Joe opinion does not count anymore. Corporations do not care about consumers opinion, the money is in other big corporations. In an unequal world with such high wealth concentration, power concentrates around that power.
The discourse is around growth for CEOs to get big bonuses, the trust comes from the promise of increased profits and reduced employee count. Your or my trust does not matter, so they do not even try.
Is me writing a blog post about how much I personally like hamburgers a business? Because that can be interpreted as having business intent in Germany. As soon as I drop the name of a fast food restaurant, it can be interpreted as advertisement that I got paid for. Yes I could easily prove that this isn't the case if asked, but thats work.
Not so. German courts actually take a look at the site and apply common sense judgement. If it's obviously a personal blog, nobody is going to successfully litigate against you. There's a lot of FUD involved in these discussions.
Some time more than 10 years ago, industry standard moved away form Linux, Apache, open source, etc. to big-tech. Many developers attending conferences cannot differentiate propaganda (Facebook connected, Google I/O, etc.) from a technical presentation . And they moved all their stack to software and hardware that is not under their control. A total failure of engineering but a big win for shareholders.
> Maybe a few years down the line they might open up more jobs so over long enough time spans its not zero sum
Also, everybody benefits from a society that chooses qualified people for a position, and gives everybody an opportunity to get a job. But that is also something that shows over time and many processes, and it is harder to see in the moment.
Nepotism is the zero-sum version of applying for a job. Only the power to take away from others is accounted, no qualification required just raw power. Which nepo-baby gets the government contract, the board position, etc. is a zero-sum game and participants behave like what it is. Betrayal, lies, etc. is part of that game.
> To me this suggests that theater’s are at least partially incorrectly pricing things which explains why they are struggling.
Theaters are struggling because they need the working class to attend, and the working class has no money. This is true for any non-essential business that depends on 90% of the people.
To find new ways of extract money may help a little, but in the end the basic economics do not add up.
A couple of years ago Odeon turned our nearest theatre into a 'luxe' theatre (adult tickets £20), and the next nearest theatre was left as it was, but all tickets £5 each (tickets at both theatres where about £14 previously). I think it was an experiment to see which model was most economic: major investment in tech and comfort/£100+ for a family of four to watch a film with snacks and beverages/fewer tickets sold as a result OR minimal capex/far more affordable to attend/loads more tickets sold. The £5 tickets for all showings have stopped, but you can still get them a lot of the time (they have surge pricing for blockbuster releases,and some upgraded premium seating now). I think they've found a way to be affordable to the masses and fill seats, but still extract max revenue from better off families, by having half their theatres follow one model and half follow the other.
For all tickets is similarly insane. It needs to be demand driven - sold out show? Prices too low. Can’t get butts in seats? prices too high.
You want prices set such that it’s almost but not quite at capacity. This gives you slack to accept stragglers while optimizing your profit on the price demand curve.
The problem is that if you take this too far, nobody knows what it costs to go to the movies, so everyone will just stick the "high cost" in their mind, and not go.
This is why they always gravitate to "$5 before noon/4pm" or "$5 Tuesdays" or similar things that are easy to remember.
I'm waiting for them to have the best seats in the house be the large armchairs for $20, and the rest of the shitseats be normal stadium seating for $5.
Make it app driven to simplify like Uber does. And it should be closer to how large theatrical shows are - fridays at peak time most expensive, different seats have different pricing etc. anyway, movie theaters hit a local optimum decades ago and the people running them failed to evolve.
that is psychologically a really bad customer experience; no one wants to feel like they are being "value extracted" to the greatest extent the company can get away with. airlines do this sort of continuously varying pricing and people hate it, but they don't have much choice in the matter. if that sort of negative perception gets attached to going to the movies the public simply won't.
This might be and not an objective data, 2 more things seem relevant :
1. New releases get on stream within weeks to couple of months.
2. Lots of new movies are supposed to be a TV movie and not a theater release (subjective)
I go to the movies way more than needed and I stopped blindly going to the movies and started to check reviews before because so many movies were really bad which is something I very rarely have experienced in the past (even when I had unlimited passes and seeing more than 1 movies per week)
I've heard anecdotally that cellphones had a measurable impact on opening weekend ticket sales, because people who saw an early showing and thought it sucked would text their friends and warn them not to bother. previously movies could at least rely on a couple of days before the bad reviews spread.
That may be, but people are still paying to go to theaters. Prices are simultaneously too low off peak and too high during peak. This used to be ok when it averaged out but the marketplace has a lot less slack due to baby reasons including the ones you mentioned
At least in America the working class has the highest inflation adjusted income in history. The bottom quartile of incomes went up 30% in the last 5 years. Its one reason why services have gotten more expensive
Theater attendance is down every year since 2001(I believe) the "working class" has much more disposable income than back then adjusted for inflation. Movies are hilariously cheap, people just prefer streaming and TikTok. It's sad but i have accepted this fate.
It is interesting that it seems to easier to take over a legit game than trying to create a new one. I have seen this with youtube channels, inactive during a long period of time and suddenly showing mostly scams. Or the original owner became a criminal, or more probably were taken over criminals.
> The malware allegedly searched for cryptocurrency wallet browser extensions, including MetaMask, before connecting to external servers and downloading additional tools. These tools were reportedly capable of stealing browser information, passwords, and cryptocurrency wallet data.
Cryptocurrencies are the most insecure currency that we have even invented. It is paradoxical that is being marketed as actually safe.
reply