TheGalacticVoid

Roast her back

Yes and no. The cheese is supposed to be a liquid or sauce

I doubt that the Switch 2 needs emulation as it's very likely to be the successor to the Tegra X1

Defcon is a useful resource for networking and learning. It being run by and for good guys doesn't mean bad guys don't find the event useful. The vague risk of "getting caught" is probably worth taking, regardless of whether that risk is tangible, especially if they follow proper security practices.

I don't think you fully understand right to repair.

Companies (most egregiously Apple, but Samsung, Microsoft, and other tech, farming, and medical companies as well) have been actively introducing barriers to self or third-party repairs for decades. Apple serializes their displays on iPhones, so if you were to swap the screen on an iPhone without Apple's authorization or without specific hardware, your iPhone disables specific features on your new screen, even if it's a genuine Apple part. Apple also has incredibly unfair and invasive contracts with their authorized service providers such that they have to provide a slower return window than Apple's own service centers. Furthermore, Apple et al. don't sell every part needed to fix phones, and even when they do sell parts, they are often sold as packages or bundles that make the parts unnecessarily expensive.

To be clear, it's rare for companies to ban third-party repairs outright. However, the vast majority of device makers artificially limit who can buy spare parts and who can fix their devices via software, by tight supply chain control, lawsuits, or getting governments to seize the few parts that could be obtained. This means that most third-party stores can't compete with manufacturers because they can't get genuine parts without becoming "authorized", and by becoming authorized, they can't provide a quality service.

You're ignoring the fact that it's nearly impossible to implement this right now. Big pharma and numerous politicians want to keep the status quo for as long as possible. By the time we have more affordable medicine, numerous people would have suffered greatly or died because they couldn't access the medicine they need. Having solutions that don't require an entire rework of the healthcare industry is necessary so that we can save as many lives as possible.

I get your point now. I interpreted your comment as "he was born rich". I also didn't watch the exposé until after I wrote mine.

Then you should also not like how Google has a history of making their sites, which are market leaders in many cases including search, perform worse on browsers other than Chrome. That is considered anti-competitive behavior.

Just because it's losing market share doesn't mean it's not a monopoly, let alone an illegal one.

The problem is that a lot of companies are already launching dead-on-arrival live service games, so unless they're willing to make something unique, all they will do is saturate the market further and keep burning money. I don't think this law would change those incentives much if at all.

I'm curious as to why you say that as he literally used his first sponsorship to pay off his mom's mortgage and seems to come from an average standard of living.

Edit: I didn't see the hit piece / exposé that was made about him until now

From what I know about him, he is a genuine person, and his projects are done to help people if possible.

I know that many influencers profit off of suffering/kindness in a scummy way, but I believe that MrBeast is one of the few that actually try to do it ethically.