JoshuaFalken

Evil was a stretch, sure. Though while I appreciate the concept of not attributing malice to what incompetence explains, I think that needs to be couched by whether or not a profit is being turned by the action.

Someone? I’m talking about having a corporation admit it’s own wrongdoing, not a specific individual.

You just know someone in the chain wanted to be able to say, ‘we were the first’, then they got fact checked and had to add in that qualifier of commercially available ground station.

Surely any rational individual already acknowledges that subject as lunacy. The segment of people that after seeing the joke would fall victim to the conspiracy is bound to be smaller than the segment that find it mildly amusing.

While the company admitted no wrongdoing, it must pay $1.7 million in civil penalties, as well as $277,251 to cover investigation costs as well as to “support future enforcement of consumer protection laws.”

Why is it we allow these companies to pretend they did no evil? The penalty should have been a couple orders of magnitude higher, and they should have had to admit what they did. Obviously we don’t live in a world where both those things would happen, but we don’t even get one of them?

They surely made more than two million doing this and so the fine is meaningless. The real way to make it meaningful would be to force the admission of guilt, and then use the admission as justification to stop them from buying out the competition for 18 billion dollars.

Look how they deceived their customers, good thing they can do it to even more customers now!

Damn, no one got the joke about the two top commenters in the thread becoming the same entity?

Oh well, it was pretty low effort.

Pretty big thought you’ve got there.

Have you considered joining forces with another influential thought leader such as @oakey66@lemm.ee? Together you could better serve the commenting community across the platform.

Is it just me or does that bike have a kink in its neck?

I’m a third party in this chat, not Anivia@feddit.org.

Your initial comment here was pointing out that a component of a computer build is as expensive as an entire console. Valid point, though it does ignore that the component you had in mind is superior to what Sony’s put into their machine. It’s not really an apples to apples comparison. More like an apple from the grocery compared to picking a basket of apples from an orchard.

You seem to be pointing out that higher performance per dollar is possible with a high end computer. This is correct.

Anivia on the other hand was only saying that for the same money or less as a Playstation 5 Pro, you can get more performance by spending your dollars on a computer instead of a console. This is correct.

You two seem to be saying the same thing: Sony’s console is overpriced for what it is, and a better experience can be had going with a pc.

Way to move the goal post on your argument.