By the plain text reading, yes. Would be nice to see PS streams fall to 0, but people ignore the terms and Sony doesn't enforce them until they want to. Doesn't matter what any of this BS says until they drag you in front of a judge... I mean private arbitrator... and say "look, plain as day, subsection 18.XXVI.xix D(13a) on page 47 where it clearly says we get to move our VP into his spare bedroom and shoot his dog"
We seriously are overdue for putting limits on so-called consumer contracts.
Step 0: Company secretly abuses you.
Step 1: New regulation requires that the abuse be disclosed.
More than I expected out of this administration. Honestly thought they'd say "Do it more! Abuse of customers is innovation or something!"
Obviously the solution is actually to make this practice illegal and aggressively persue violators like they're Ecuadorian fishermen and a new batch of Epstein emails dropped with incomplete redactions, but the bar for this administration is so low it's somewhere at the bottom of the river Styx, so gg I guess.
Maybe, but Amazon in particular will also bag/box every solitary thing. Not sure if it balances, but it's an interesting question when you put it that way.
Still, I expect they prioritize meeting service levels over fuel economy.
The company benefits by convincing investors that it's still growing and innovating. If investors think they are still growing their stock prices go up. If their stock prices go up then they can use their stock as an asset to borrow against or as a form of payment in lieu of cash. Stock is particularly useful to a company as a medium of exchange because they can just make more. But they can only do that without tanking the value if people are buying, and they can only keep people buying if they think the price will go up, and the only thing the price will go up if they think the company is going to become more profitable in the future.
This is basically Cory Doctrow's argument in his latest book.
I mean, in my opinion, making a stochastic agentic program is irresponsible, selling it as AI is unethical, and using it is also irresponsible, but there's a question of how much an average Joe Shmoe should be liable for given how the tools are marketed. It's complicated, but it's not an unsolvable problem.
It's also a matter of audience. Part of what lets Nebula work at all is the built-in audience for the creators that are there. Same with droput.tv and c5.now and even means.tv.
Peertube will work better as more and bigger creators cross-post to it. Another challenge it faces though is scaling and yes, monetization since there's no subscription system through the platform by default.
By the plain text reading, yes. Would be nice to see PS streams fall to 0, but people ignore the terms and Sony doesn't enforce them until they want to. Doesn't matter what any of this BS says until they drag you in front of a judge... I mean private arbitrator... and say "look, plain as day, subsection 18.XXVI.xix D(13a) on page 47 where it clearly says we get to move our VP into his spare bedroom and shoot his dog"
We seriously are overdue for putting limits on so-called consumer contracts.