this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
191 points (94.4% liked)

Anti-Corporate Movement

409 readers
1 users here now

This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.

Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.

Current topics this includes but is not limited to:

Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.

Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.

But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.

But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.

But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.

But then they will "live" in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.nowsci.com/post/5896434

Quest 1 becomes near-E-waste Apr 30

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A year ago Quest 1's accounted for 2% of Quest headsets being used. That number definitely dropped down significantly.

Nobody will make any sort of money releasing games that are Q1 exclusive, no matter which storefront they are on.

[–] antidote101@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Oh that's interesting is there a specific source or place I could review such stats? As an Oculus 1 developer I'd be interested to.

Part of why I'm developing for Quest 1 personally is that it's so under powered that it's helping me learn optimisation.

...but I would like to one day do something more profitable with my knowledge/training.

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

I was refering to this article, I looked it up since I was vaguely remembering reading a similar figure. It's a year old (before Q3 was released) and the 2% figure is provided by the devs of Zenith to justify not supporting the headset any more.

Which shows quite clearly that VR devs figured out it's not worth supporting Q1 long time before this step by meta.

Can't find any more recent stats aside from this Steam hardware survey showing Q1 at 1.37%. Of course, that counts people who used Q1 to play PCVR via Steam and the percentage is out of all headsets, not just the Quest line, so the results are definitely skewed, though it confirms Q1 is far from popular these days.

The thing about it is that it was a bit of an experiment and being a success it was iterated upon very fast, with the Q2 improving on it in almost all respects and for the same price, so it was quickly overtaken. I suspect the Q2 will keep being used by a big chunk of userbase for longer, though we'll see if the rumoured Q3 lite changes that.