Thanks for jumping in on this. I just think OP has heard DRM bad and not thought about what DRM means. Once youre asking for a service that does everything for you, DRM doesn’t really play a role.

I could see an arguement for open playlist formats or something so you could move your account history around, but there is a limit to how useful or practical that would even be.

I mean I understand and support DRM free media, but I literally don’t understand what OP is asking for. If they don’t want to own/manage the music, then what part would be DRM free?

It already exists, but the sands of time Metroidvania “Lost Crowns” was surprisingly good.

How would you define a DRM-free online service? If you aren’t managing your own files, why would DRM free matter?

Thanks, OP seemed more curious about the technical aspects than just the absurdity of the comment (since pretty much every business uses SQL) so hoped a more technical explanation might be appreciated.

Sure, basically any time you have a many-to-many relationship you’ll have to repeat keys multiple times. Think students taking courses. You’d have a students table and a courses table, but the relationship is many students take many courses. So you’d want a third table for lookups where each row is [student_id, course_id].

This stackoverflow post has a similar example with authors and books - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13970628/how-do-i-model-a-many-to-many-relation-in-sql-server#13970688

If SSNs are used as a primary key (a unique identifier for a row of data) then they’d have to be duplicated to be able to merge data together.

However, even if they aren’t using ssn as an identifier as it’s sensitive information. It’s not uncommon to repeat data either for speed/performance sake, simplicity in table design, it’s in a lookup table, or you have disconnected tables.

Having a value repeated doesn’t tell you anything about fraud risk, efficency, or really anything. Using it as the primary piece of evidence for a claim isn’t a strong arguement.

I think the core takeaway is your shouldn’t outsource core capabilities. If the code is that critical to your bottomline, pay for quality (which usually means no contractors - local or not).

If you outsource to other developers or AI it means most likely they will care less and/or someone else can just as easily come along and do it too.

Maybe below what investors or OpenAI thinks, but I think I’d take it. Unless they’ve got more secrets up their sleeve I don’t seem them ever being worth that much.

You’re absolutely right a out data formatting being an issue and something that really does cause vendor lockin.

I would just think content creators would still want archive/backup of the final products (the video itself). For example could you imagine if a movie just disappeared because Adobe or someone shutdown.

Longer!=Detailed

Generally what they’re calling out is that DeepSeek currently rambles more. With LLMs the challenge is how to get the right answer most sussinctly because each extra word is a lot of time/money.

That being said, I suspect that really it’s all roughly the same. We’ve been seeing this back and forth with LLMs for a while and DeepSeek, while using a different approach, doesn’t really break the mold.

I think most of the tools have a way to download content, the issue is no one does or has a system for their backups. Which is the risk with the cloud, you’re putting all your eggs in someone elses basket.

This was actually something I found interesting with the brief TikTok shutdown in the US. A lot of creators only had their content in the editing software owned by TikTok or the app itself, meaning they lost access to all of their content.

The biggest risk of cloud only setups is you don’t own it.

The asynchronous games were a lot of fun. https://www.mariowiki.com/Nintendo_Land had a couple of them, like one where everyone is in first person mode chasing the tablet player who has a top down view.

I mean using proprietary data has been an issue with models as long as I’ve worked in the space. It’s always been a mixture of open weights, open data, open architecture.

I admit that it became more obvious when images/videos/audio became more accessible, but from things like facial recognition to pose estimation have all used proprietary datasets to build the models.

So this isn’t a new issue, and from my perspective not an issue at all. We just need to acknowledge that not all elements of a model may be open.

I mean, you can have open source weights, training data, and code/model architecture. If you’ve done all three it’s an open model, otherwise you state open “component”. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

If you want to limit consumer decisions to subscription vs no-subscriptions than sure, but subscriptions are just one element of the choices people have to make.

You also have issues like data privacy, ethical labor, maintainability, etc. Too many things for everyone to keep up with and effectively vote with their wallet.

There are a couple of problems with this logic and it’s why regulations are critical to a functioning world.

1. Frequently people need something today(ish) and don’t have the luxury to wait. Food is a great example, but depending on the person/entity most things can end up being urgent (like I need a laptop today for work/school)
2. No one knows the ins/outs of every industry. While Lemmys more technical users can see the issues with so many accounta/subscriptions, that doesn’t mean the general public does.

Its certainly more nuanced than that, but that’s just a quick breakdown of the challenges of voting with your wallet.

I think you mean if people understood inflation was caused by the pandemic and Trumps monetary policy we wouldn’t be here.

The number one factor in the election was the economy. Sadly, regarding Palestine, I think democrats would loss as many votes as they gained by taking a harder stance.

I don’t know, definitely feels like the democrats passively supported, while Trump seems to want to participate.

Can’t say the democrats were making the right choice, but Trumps stance is objectively worse.