• 3 Posts
  • 2.68K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle
  • I knew comments like this would turn up. But it still saddens me that even Lemmy users, who ar in general much more cognizant of these things and less likely to get caught up in the circlejerk, can’t acknowledge that Gabe Newell isn’t your best freind, he is in fact just another money hungry corporate CEO.

    You say comparing valve to say, blizzard is incredible, but the points you use to defend valve can also be made of them.

    Is Overwatch 2 not free? With no pay 2 win features? Does Blizzard not pay for the server hosting anti cheat and matchmaking? Do they not also support there game for years? ( also I find that funny given the fact the TF2 community is going ballistic right now over the fact valve isn’t doing shit to support it against cheaters and bots)

    Yes they provide a store front anyone can sell on. Including shitty asset flips, early access pump and dumps, predatory spyware etc. And are very reluctant to do litersly anything about it when those scams are called to attention.

    And again, that storefront isn’t some altruistic endeavour Gabe took on out the kindness of his heart. No he’s made BILLIONS by exploiting the worl of others, just like every other billionaire. And if providing a basic service makes up for your predatory bullshit, well we might as well let literally every other CEO off the hook then right?

    It’s not a bad in to admit you got sucked in my propaganda or marketing or just general Internet circlejerks, what is a bad thing is to vehemently refuse any introspection on your current beliefs and defend them to the death simply because they are what you currently believe. I really hope I can reach out to people on Lemmy and that you guys can actually take a step and try to look at things objectively instead of doubling down.


  • Nah people need to stop jerking off Gabe and valve I general.

    They started predatory lootboxes, ridiculously expensive cosmetics, early access, owning a licence instead of the actual game, had to be sued just to get refund policy and the vast vast majority of his wealth has come from just skimming a bit off from people who actually make games he distributes.

    If you look at valve without the “omg steams sale XXXDDD”" mentality, then they are no better than ea or Activision.



    1. That’s kind of the point. The UK typically doesn’t feel the need to demand back it’s artifacts

    2. Some of those artifacts are contested

    3. My entire series of comments is about the fact that these are not clear cut, but as is the case with every random chucklefuck on the internet that thinks they are an expert or an authority on something they have a surface level, at best, understanding of, you’re taking an extreme position, arguing it’s clearly the correct one and the situation is obvious and without nuance and then staunchly and irrationally refusing to anything that challenges your simple minded binary world view.

    4. Imagine you bought something from someone fairly, then a day later they claim it has a lot of significance to them and demand you give it back without compensation. Are you going to give it to them? Does it still “belong” to them? Any rational person would say no.

    5. Well basically every prominent historian who’s weighed in on the matter thinks they hold water, so I’m not going to give much credence to random angry person on lemmy with little knowledge on the subject.

    Bye



  • Do you the UK would ever tolerate another country doing that with their cultural artifacts?

    Yes, because do. The bayuex tapestry held by france. Henry VIII letters to Anne Boleyn held by the Vatican, the Vercelli book held In Italy, parts of old British warships kept by the Dutch, French and Spanish, The Codex Amiatinus, in Florence, most of Shakespeare’s originals are in the US, Charles I art collection, several entire buildings like Agecroft hall and James Cook’s house, even old London Bridge could fall under this category. And countless (and I really do mean countless) less import ones that have ended up in other countries, primarily the US, in state museums.

    And a lot of those were acquired with much less legality than the Elgin marbles.

    why should the UK hold onto them today and not Greece? What right do they have?

    The fact that they were acquired legally with permission of the government of the time, now have history outside of their original ones in Greece, allow the teaching of its history to be spread to more people and be viewed in the wider context of global history.

    And as I said before, if I was forced to chose, I would err on the side of them being returned. My point is to point out it isn’t a simple and black and white case of the eeeeeevil British blatantly stealing things and refusing to give them back just to be cunts.






  • While I would say the Elgin marbles are a case that err on the side of they should be returned, again reality is not as simple and black and white as people like you want it to be.

    When Elgin took the marbles the entire area was, by all accounts, in shambles and people were burning pieces of these statues to aquire lime to build with. And that was one of the reasons Elgin decided to remove the marbles, so they are preserved today because they were removed.

    Then there’s also the argument that they do in fact legally belong to the UK, Elgin got permission from both the ottoman empire and local authorities in Athens to remove the sculptures. Then the actions were also ratified when Elgin was twice given permissions by the ottomans to ship the statues out of Athens. No historian worth there salt will tell you they are stolen. That is a position held by Greeks, people pressured by them and people that have seen a tumble post or reddit article about the marbles and gone full dunning-kruger, thinking they know the intricacies of the whole situation.


  • gmtom@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldWhat a legacy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    If it doesn’t belong to them, they should relinquish it. Simple as that

    Ignoring the rest of your comme to focus on this part because I love it when people declare complex issues “simple” and give 1 dimensional solutions to it.

    How do you determine if it doesn’t belong to them?

    For example I think most people would say if they bought the artifacts legitimately, then they belong to them right?

    What about cases when they legitimately buy artifacts from people who themselves acquired them I legitimately? Or how do you even determine legitimacey? Is someone finding a historical object mean it belongs to them and they can do what they like with it? What if it’s on public land? What if it’s private land and they are working on it and find it? What about when ownership of the land is disputed?

    What about cases like the rosetta stone, that was found ina rubble heap by French forces and eventually given to Britain as part of war confessions. Should that frenchman have left it in a pile, doomed to be destroyed because it doesn’t belong to him?

    It’s not British museum but the koh-i-noor diamond that’s part of the crown jewels, often claimed that the UK should give it back. Who do you give it back to?

    Do you give it to India as the successor state of the kingdom of Punjab who handed over to the British after they lost a war? Do you give it back to Kashmir as the successor of Jammu who the Punabs stole it from? Do you give it to Pakistan as it was once the property of the Sikh empire? Or do you give it to Iran as it was first record in the possession of Nader Shah?




  • gmtom@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldWhat a legacy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Not to commit a high crime of having a nuanced take on a circle-jerked to death issue. But many of the “stolen” artifacts only exist today because they were safe guarded by the musuem. Many more would be at best, kept in complete private collections away from the public and historians. And plenty more don’t have a direct modern day counterpart, or have split modern ancestry, so don’t have a clear place to return them to if they wanted to return them.

    And yes, there are some artifacts where none of that applies and they should be returned, but I would believe those to be the minority.



  • Personally I think there’s a big difference between being perceived as a man and being directly told “no it’s not “shitty people”, it’s men”

    You can’t really do much about people’s perception, but you can absolutely change whether you’re directly a dick to someone because of how they were born.


  • gmtom@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneStitch rule
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    So what is your point?

    What is your smug, dismissive attitude achieving?

    I know this statement doesn’t apply to me, but it still hurts me. Just the same as any generalisation.

    I’m sure you’ll say something about privilege, and I somewhat agree, but someone having privilege does not make it okay to completely dismiss them and group them in with shitty people for things out of their control.

    And again, rhetoric like this is one of the reason that young men are moving away from progressives into the hands of the alt-right. If you want things to get better and want men to be better, the first step is to not be an asshole to them for no reason.