When buying Whale Rock games, you know they have no value and it won't make a difference, if the hosting servers blow up or not.

and you don’t own a whale rock game either when you buy one, so that is a silly argument, that you do not own a digital product has been my argument all along so far... I'm not sure if you are doing this on purpose, or if you do not get my argument.

sigh... I am sorry to say so, but any company today that are using crypto mining are short-sighted, self-centred, greedy bastards. The world is burning down around us, and they are using more an more resources to produce nothing else than greed. It is not that crypto-mining use that much energy, it is that the energy is used to produce nothing at all, it is completely wasted, there is absolutely nothing coming out of it at all. Not only do they waste this energy, but the way crypto mining works is that you need to use more and more energy to produce the same amount of crypto currency, it is scaling upwards, it is built into the system. At some point, the cost in energy will be higher than the value of the bitcoin, and it will then collapse.

Your company mining crypto is also not argument for ownership. With crypto you still do not own anything. This has been seen before, with crypto currencies that collapsed (as they all will, as the fundament of all of them is build on air), and the people who “owned” that currency… was showed to not own anything. Crypto is nothing more than an elaborate pyramid scheme, and everyone involved and purposefully engaging to perpetuate and prop it up should be ashamed .

(If you would. could you let me know the name of your company so I can black list and boycott them from any company I would deal with?)

fun fact, you don’t own a NFT either :)

Just because you can spend money on something, or make transactions, or something have a value, it does not mean that you have ownership of anything, these are different concepts.

There are many things we spend money on and that has value, that we do not own. For example, anything involving time and experiences.

When it comes to crypto (or NFTs) these are non-existing products that has only got a value which is arbitrary given to them by a group of people who have told you that this is the value it has. In fact, you don’t own anything, because there is nothing there to own.

If a man comes to me on the street and offers to me buy the Golden Gate Bridge, and I give him money, it does not mean that I now own the Golden Gate Bridge… a transaction was made, though

Not really pertinent to the discussion but we can say pretty much the same about playing games on the so called "high end" computers at high settings and refresh rates.

et least you get something out of that, even if it is only personal enjoyment with your hobby which can have good psychological and mental benefits

Bingo!

Here's something funny in that regard:

"Twitter founder Jack Dorsey's first ever tweet has been sold for the equivalent of $2.9m (£2.1m) to a Malaysia-based businessman.

The tweet, which said "just setting up my twttr," was first published on March 21, 2006 and was auctioned off by Mr Dorsey for charity.

The Malaysia-based buyer Sina Estavi compared the purchase to buying a Mona Lisa painting.

The tweet was bought using the ether cryptocurrency, a rival to bitcoin.

It was sold as a nonfungible token (NFT) on Monday to Mr Estavi, the chief executive of technology firm Bridge Oracle.

[...]

"This is not just a tweet!" Mr Estavi posted on Twitter. "I think years later people will realize the true value of this tweet, like the Mona Lisa painting."

And lo and behold: years later - people did that exactly:

The buyer of a non-fungible token (NFT) of Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey's first tweet says he "may never sell it" after receiving a series of low bids.

Malaysia-based Sina Estavi has been offered just over $6,200 (£4,720), about 0.2% of the $2.9m he paid for it.

Mr Estavi has compared the digital asset to Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa.

The tweet, which says "just setting up my twttr," was first posted in March 2006 and was auctioned off last year by Mr Dorsey for charity.

Mr Estavi bought the tweet in the form of a NFT in March 2021.

NFTs have been touted as the digital answer to collectibles. However, they have no tangible form of their own, and experts have warned about risks in the market.

[...]

Mr Estavi, who is the chief executive of blockchain company Bridge Oracle, had earlier claimed that he had been offered $10m for the tweet.

However, the highest bid was valued at $6,222.36 on Thursday.

Sources:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56492358 (first quote)
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-61102759 (second quote)

++++++
These things only have the worth, that some people put on them.
(admittedly, to some degree the same is true for physical things)

Here's the thing, though:
just because someone thinks, something is worth some price (here: 2.9m), and that someone also has the money (well, crypto currency) to pay that price, doesn't mean that that something is actually worth that price.

You can put a price tag on anything, and on that price tag, you can write any price you want...but as long as no one is buying for that price, that item is not worth that price.

++++++
Oh, and since I'm such a nice guy, here's the tweet in question, free for all of you:
(regardless of the fact, that someone thought, this was worth 2.9m)

Haven't been following the discussion due to unexpected life stuff.

I've skimmed a few new posts from post #50 onwards. What I gather from this is that in the last 11 years, whatever progress has been made, it was quickly retracted. Is that a good assumption? Basically, a moot ruling from the EU's power-that-be?

And do you know how many I have the same?

Well for starters there is only one copy that you can sell only once, which doesn't need policing (illegal scenarios aside).

I wouldn't have relied on them not getting a cut. Look at what happened to the secondhand book market.

And on top of that, look at degradation with a physical product ... scratches etc. Physical copies don't tend to have much of a life on average. I know that through personal experience, and I say that as one of the few who actually looks after his discs ... properly.

So I don't think it is much of a concern the secondhand market for discs. A digital copy is good add infinitum.
Some other media, like books, fare a lot better secondhand on average.

Physical by its very nature doesn't need policing if it has DRM.
NOTE - I am talking about a digital copy without DRM ... and I am of course ignoring the illegal scenarios.

I thought it was obvious that the game providers would keep challenging what they don't like and don't agree with. That costs money. Comparing that cost to digital copies is flawed, as it isn't like physical copies that cost for every print run and storage etc. Not getting money is not the same as outlaying money.

Just because I have stated these things, doesn't mean I am happy about them or agree with how the Gaming Industry goes about its business ... I mostly don't. Just like I don't believe in DRM on anything. No matter how we feel though, we are not in control and don't get much of a say, and those big companies in control have much more money to defend their interests, than we do.

Yay! We're in agreement!

You seem to be missing something, and that's a digital copy suddenly disappearing, or rather whole libraries. I have 800+ games in my GoG library alone. If i die... those copies will at present never be accessible again. That's worse than slight degradation of a physical disc or scratches over time; or making a copy and playing the copy while using the original.

Sony recently declares they are removing all Discovery content and anything you BOUGHT they give the middle finger while singing 'goodbye, and thanks for all the fish'

And yet physical has tons of DRM regardless. 360 discs? DRM and signed and won't let you play the games unless you do DREADED TERRIBLE HORRIBLE POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL emulation in which you simulate the hardware... Actually nearly all console games and discs had some form of DRM on them. So i don't see why you say it doesn't have DRM.

To note most movies also have DRM, via encryption. The key usually was baked into the hardware players (which later gets leaked so they can be decrypted by normal people). Trying to copy VOB files in the past can result in every other 512 bytes or something totally garbled and unwatchable. Then the DVD players if they detect you MAY have a recording device, lowering the video screen so terribly it's unviewable, which is annoying as fuck.

One of the more infamous ones actually i believe was the Dreamcast, which had a burned in worble effect somewhere at the outer edges or the base of the disc and if that worble wasn't there it wouldn't verify or open the game.

I'd love to just use my hardware for it's full potential, be to play backup games or homebrew. Instead half my hardware is a paperweight because i can't be bothered anymore.

The only thing i've seen so far (Gaming or otherwise) is that not-really-piracy is justified, and moreso every day.

They said games will be cheaper digital because the physical costs aren't there... except they aren't, if anything they are getting more expensive (and broken) as time goes on. (though it does allow 'deeper discounts' over a longer period, hard to say with games that can be tens of thousands of dollars with all avaliable DLC)
Games that are digital you'd own forever.. unless the company decides otherwise
The understanding of ownership (to humans) hasn't changed but due to loopholes and legaleese they are merely 'renting' things to you.
Digital content can be removed or changed, censored or swapped out at their discretion
And they want to go back to the arcade model PPV for every piece of content you want to access because they earn more money that way, as everything is a subscription service.

They are pushing a world where You will own nothing, and you will be happy.

I always keep saying that in the next 50 years or so law makers will need to have a major discussion about digital library inheritance. The whole concept of a digital library is very new, maybe ~20 years or so, so nobody thinks about what happens after death. If they do think, they probably say transferring is not allowed and call it a day. Physical media can be legally sold gifted and inherited.

A game/movie/music collection may be one of the most valuable possessions a person may have, physical or digital. This possession must not be lost when they die. There needs to be a way to official transfer ownership, once a death certificate is presented.

Otherwise people will just hand over their credentials without informing the digital store. I would like to say that it will be interesting to know how Steam or GOG would handle an active 150 year old account, but I guess none of us will find out. Such accounts will be a thing though, you can bet on that.

Agreed.

Though i also hope there's local services, say Walmart where they will burn copies of your games to disc (DVD or Blueray) and you can pick them up to make up a collection; Naturally you'd verify you have the games, but then you could then convert to a physical library of offline installers; And if games are DRM'd, then the cracked versions would be provided instead that don't rely on the steam client internet connection or the like. And if they are extra nice, the leftover space they'd add things like mods, extras that make it more complete but doesn't actually affect the game by itself.

Yeah it's not as good as pressed discs, but it would go a long ways probably.