𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠

Thanks for confirming! Really this dev just needs more maintainers for his project, but sadly people won’t step up.

You can open up sandbox maps if you want. Not all missions are timed either, some just let you smash shit.

He rewrote the test suite to Python using AI tools, which I believe people are saying caused some otherwise detected cases to be missed.

No, Ubisoft tried to offer a partial game for free, distributed via Steam, but sold paid full access for cheap on Uplay. Basically, a “purchase full access to this Steam game on our storefront so we don’t have to pay the fee we’d normally pay to get Steam to distribute the game for us”.

The issue with the Ubisoft case was that Ubisoft offered R6S in a free, restricted mode and a full mode. However, Ubisoft allowed you to obtain the free version from Steam (distributed by Steam servers) but offered a cheaper way to access the full game on Uplay only.

So you could get the full game, distributed by Steam without spending a penny on Steam, as long as you purchase it on Uplay. That’s just Ubisoft trying to dodge Steam’s policy prohibiting cheaper access to Steam distributed games on other storefronts.

It’s kinda like you providing a free game on Steam, but upon opening it you have to enter your credit card details first in order to access the rest of the game. You’re just using Steam’s services for free at that point, and that is obviously dodging the policy.

https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Hawkwoman

Just one note - Valve don’t care whether or not Steam keys are provided - if you sell on Steam then you can’t sell anywhere else cheaper.

That’s the claim made, but Valve has stressed this isn’t the case and the policy text doesn’t support that claim either. It very explicitly mentions Steam keys.

EA often does this actually for the games they offer through the EA app. EA has their own infra so you don’t get a Steam key if you purchase it from there. As a result EA games are occasionally slightly cheaper there or go on sale a bit more often than they do on Steam, so they can lure customers to their own storefront.

What you’re describing sounds a lot like iOS’s/Google’s IAP fee cut and the controversy around it.

It doesn’t. Those platforms demanded that apps use their infrastructure to do any and all IAP. iOS and Google use their position to lock down the storefront on user devices, being the de facto only option to use. Valve makes no such efforts, they even deliberately opened up their devices to other stores as well as integrated the launching of those storefronts for the games that “require” them. The only thing Valve demands is that you don’t abuse their infrastructure to get free game distribution while cashing in somewhere else.

You can still do IAP ingame btw (without going through Valve), you should just offer the same on Steam directly (see shark cards in GTA for example). There’s a difference between preventing the abuse of your resources and anti-competitive behaviour.

But that’s commercial suicide now. It’s list, or die, basically.

It’s not. Sales will be lower if you ignore the largest platform, obviously, but that would be true even if Steam had a lower market share (eg 40% or whatever). But it’s not true that it becomes entirely unprofitable to publish games outside of Steam. Which btw, you are allowed to do for a lower price, provided you don’t provide a Steam key upon purchase.

This is an older article. Ubisoft was (and is?) pulling some shady shit here though. What they’re doing:

• Selling the base game via Steam for free (limited features, but most important stuff is there) or a frequently discounted amount for full access (think less than 10 bucks).
• Selling a bonus starter pack that can be used for the Steam game for a larger amount (used to be 20? Looks like 15 now) exclusively via Ubisoft’s own platform.

So for a new player to get started, they’d get the base game for free, with Valve paying for all the costs related to the download infrastructure, etc…, and then pay Ubisoft directly for their ingame starter gear, bypassing Valve entirely. This was just an attempt by Ubisoft to skirt by Valve’s rules.

Valve is extremely lenient when it comes to this sort of stuff. But they’re not going to allow a publisher to abuse the system to essentially get free game distribution via Steam while still making a profit via this side channel. It’s basically a way to bypass the Steam key resell rule, where Steam keys may not be resold for lower prices on other platforms (but you don’t have to pay the 30% fee when you do).

To put Ubisoft’s case to the extreme, imagine a game comes out for free on Steam, but opening it opens up another storefront where you first need to pay 60 bucks to actually play the game. Does it make sense for Valve to continue offering their services here if they are blocked from making any money off of it?

Ukraine receives security assurances under the Budapest memorandum (which Russia violated).

Keeping cats indoors is not a US specific thing. I’m Dutch and keep mine indoors too. They’re not used to the street so letting them go out would be far too dangerous for them. We were also specifically instructed not to let them go outside when we adopted them.

They’re perfectly happy to stay inside, it’s absolutely not animal abuse. That’s just hyperbole on your part.

My sister rescued a cat who she initially let outside (because he’s used to it) but after seeing him have quite a few close calls with cars on a busier road she decided to keep him inside. He needed a day or two to adjust but appears perfectly content staying inside.

Letting cats go outside has an environmental impact, sure. It’s also not a death sentence to let them go out. Neither is keeping them in animal abuse, nor is leash training them.

Let’s turn down the heat a bit, shall we?

[30.05.2026 10:05] andrewtridgell
I reviewed it. The rsync project has been essentially a single developer project for about 20 years now


[30.05.2026 10:06] andrewtridgell
Wayne did it all himself for a long time, now I'm back doing it


[30.05.2026 10:06] realketas
why is it one man job, it seems like too complex for that


[30.05.2026 10:06] realketas
i can't even imagine


[30.05.2026 10:06] andrewtridgell
nobody else volunteers. Its the same story with thousands of open source tools


[30.05.2026 10:07] realketas
it runs entire planet, just one man does it eh


[30.05.2026 10:07] realketas
sad too


[30.05.2026 10:07] andrewtridgell
the linux kernel has thousands of paid full time devs. rsync has zero.


[30.05.2026 10:15] andrewtridgell
the most insane part is that security releases can't be community tested. Those security releases are going to be a huge part of lots and lots of open source projects for a while to come yet, just look at the rate of CVEs over the last couple of months, its gone nuts. You can't do a beta release of a security fix as its embargoed. So for the most critical fixes you *can't* have anyone else look at it. The people reporting the flaws mostly don't have the skills as they used AI to find the bugs. So the maintainer is the sole person to review the most critical security changes, and that is how the madhouse called the internet and IT security is designed. The only defence I have is to build the most comprehensive and accurate test suite I can, so when I need to deal with yet another security report I can at least quickly identify what else the fix breaks. Luckily I can do that work (the dev of the test suite) in public.


[30.05.2026 10:22] andrewtridgell
bottom line is if you want to be useful then pick holes in the test suite, find things it doesn't cover, find interactions between options it doesn't pin down, report those and offer fixes for that.
 

Basically, it’s a solo dev being swamped by LLM security reports, and since those are embargoed only maintainers can review them… and since nobody else has volunteered, he has to do it himself.

He primarily used several AIs to rewrite the test suite from shell (slow, lacking coverage) to python (parallelised, improved coverage). He says he’s extensively reviewed everything, but I guess the suite doesn’t cover everything. And the test suite changes can be community reviewed.

The dev has been actively inviting people to join as a maintainer and poke holes in the test suite, but it seems nobody has stepped up. I can’t really blame the dev here, he just seems unable to keep up without others helping him out. He’s tried to use AIs as sensibly as he could, and I’m not entirely sure if it’s slop fixes that cause the issues (or if an “unassisted” fix would have caught it).

Fuck ads, obviously, but I can understand there’s confusion here.

If GPC says “do not sell my data”, but the user subsequently opts in via the cookie banner (or vice-versa), you have two conflicting signals. There’s no clear case law or anything that says what to do. Or what should happen if the same user sends different GPC signals depending on their device or browser.

Although I guess the easiest solution is just “do not sell data if any signal suggests it’s not allowed”, but that doesn’t line advertisers’ pockets I guess.

I think it’s to suggest that this fine won’t do anything to motivate Amazon to go full electric.

Ultimately you don’t need much more than loyalty. If enough of the top brass are willing to follow Shoigu, his demotion won’t matter.

Presumably the slumbering conflict with Taiwan and in the South China Sea, as well as his support for some of the previously listed names (like Putin).

Apparently we stop the impending robot army by just putting up some steps at the border.

Removed by mod

So if they didn’t sign the pact or had left this request out of it as you seemingly desire they would have taken it wholesale?

The Nazis were somewhat surprised by the complete collapse of the Polish government. They originally had not planned to annex the entire territory, but instead pushed for a surrender of the Polish to let the Nazis take the territory they wanted, leaving a Polish puppet state. When the Poles didn’t surrender and saw their government disintegrate, that plan went out of the window.

The Soviets had other options, eg joining the west in guaranteeing Poland or signing the triple alliance even if it wasn’t everything they wanted. Too much distrust pushed them away from this option. At the time the Nazis weren’t that powerful yet and fighting a two-front war, even against a less-than-ready Red army would have likely proven to be too much. Instead, Stalin opted to side with the Nazis in dividing Poland and sacrificed western Poland to the fascist terror regime (inflicting their own terror on the east). Ultimately the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was the final trigger for the invasion of Poland.

In 41 the Nazis had gathered enough strength for a prolonged campaign in Russia, which in 39 they absolutely weren’t ready for.

It’s some kind of thing were if she goes afk, chat can decide what the player should do. In this case they decided to mine ores.