It would be nice if people just said what they were thinking.

We wanted to juice our PSN subscriber numbers, so we’re forcing everybody to make a PSN account, so hopefully they spend more money with us in the future

It is a visually a nice looking game, clearly put together with love. $15 is a bit much. It’s on the rails visual novel, with some interactive mini games to move the story forward.

Okay dragon fucker,

I understand your point, I do not agree with it. Phobia requires a state of mind. Phobia. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/phobia

Was steam’s actions driven by their fear/hate of transsexuals? Clearly not. Therefore this action is not an act of transphobia.

Words have meaning, the written in the dictionary for a reason, bending them for your political advantage may feel good, but it weakens your entire argument.

I’ve made it as clear as I can.

Yes it was a choice. It was not a choice based on people sexuality. You can dislike it, you can move to other platforms, you can pirate. But it wasn’t transphobic. They do not care about people’s sex organs

I think what it certainly means is they’ve looked at the analysis of how the traditional family sharing has been working. And they see lots of geographically dispersed groups sharing libraries.

I have a credible source tell me the original idea was that parents and children could share libraries. Because having multiple children and repurchasing your library multiple times is a burden for families.

I think they’ve both improved the system, by allowing games to run concurrently, and reduced the unintended usage of their household sharing program. A program that only exists by the good grace of the publishers, by not being a threat into game revenue. If you can make the argument it’s a family sharing, and they would have bought the game once anyway, then it’s not a problem to share the game.

I think they took the minimal cut that made this work, they could have done something ownerous like require everybody to upload IDs and prove a family relationship. But that wouldn’t scale, and it probably exclude lots of different odd family scenarios. This way they’re very inclusive. The only limitation is geographic pricing boundaries. They don’t want the one family member in Ukraine buying games for their distant family in the US at a discount. They are trying to do geofencing of the pricing.

Like you said, if it is a big problem for adults, they can just pirate the games. Steam’s trying to make it as convenient as possible for a household to not have to repurchase games without becoming a pirate

That just means epic is more performative, it doesn’t mean steam is transphobic

probably less so

Epic is less transphobic than steam because they never offered any game sharing, steam is more transphobic than epic because they have offered family game sharing… By extension of that logic that means … Offering an extra service like library sharing with family, is transphobic

It’s a creative way to live life. More power to you.

Which gaming service will you be moving to that supports global game sharing? Actually, what other game service supports sharing at all? I think steam is alone

Since epic doesn’t allow any game sharing, it’s epic more transphobic than steam? Or less transphobic than steam? Because they’re not taking away something they never offered

Why do you say it’s transphobic? It is not based on sexuality at all. Simply on economic regions

If you own games ABC, and you share them with family. Each one of your family members could be running game a, and then game b, and game c at the same time! The only limitation is multiple people can’t play the same game at the same time. So your entire library is available for concurrent usage.

The old classic version of steam sharing simply meant that only one person could play at a time, regardless of which game they were playing

The new family sharing is great. I am sad I cannot share it with family who lives 30 km away but in a different steam economic zone. I think on the whole it’s a net positive though

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/vpn/

And yet even with that pitfall there is a valid benefit of using a shared VPN over the hotspot. Specifically making your data look like it’s coming from the phone so it isn’t throttled by the carrier as tethered data. The failure scenario being the data goes slower.

I recognize the problems you list as valid, and yet there is still a beneficial tradeoff decision to be made.

No need to insult me, I both read the GitHub and understand how VPNs work.

There is no point in using a vpn if you don’t care if your data leaks outside the tunnel.

Sharing VPN from a phone over a hotspot, means all of that traffic looks like it’s coming from the phone.

True, but don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

Sharing VPN from a phone over a hotspot, means all of that traffic looks like it’s coming from the phone. Admittedly if the VPN dies, the routing will bypass it. But the benefit here is immense, if you use visible, you have unlimited data from the phone, but very slow data on tethering. Sharing the VPN from the phone, gives you unlimited data on the hotspot. That’s a pretty good trade-off

I use a calyxos device to share VPN, as of a few months ago.

Hotspot & Tethering

• Allow clients to use VPNs

https://calyxos.org/features/list/#network

Perhaps your confusing GOS? If not, can you cite the design decision to disallow this feature? I’d be curious to learn about it

If openwrt can do it, gli-net can do it

Honestly, for your use case, you should just get a older cell phone. Put lineage OS on it, or calyxos… share your VPN over hotspot, these are the only two ROMs that I’m aware of that allow you to do that. This has the benefit that the VPN traffic looks just like for traffic from the phone, and you don’t have to do any gymnastics to modify the TTL, or the operating system signature of the traffic.

Boom, travel router. Very portable, has a built-in battery etc etc etc etc etc

I like GLI-net, they are great, they have great hardware. If you want to buy it I endorse it. If you’re paranoid flash your own firmware. If you use an end-to-end VPN from your device it doesn’t matter what your mobile router uses. However the killer feature here, I think is better supplied by an older phone running the ROMs I mentioned above. It’s just more portable. And you have a backup phone when you’re traveling

The general topic was about self-hosting. IPv6 is very useful for self-hosting,… connections.

I’ll admit there is a critical mass problem with torrenting clients, but if you’re trying to set up a wire guard tunnel with your friends, IPv6 is a absolute banger

Some loyalty programs high status will give you 24 hours in a room, any 24 hours you want…

But you would be spending crazy money to get that status anyway, cheaper to just book two nights when you want more time in the room.

In most environments ipv6 bypasses cgnat (because, why would you need a nat with ipv6).