In the endless exploration, yes. In the myriad of other slapped together mechanics that don’t really tie into the exploration at all, no.
The exploration of new planets is well implemented, but that’s existed since the game launched. If you were happy with that then, you’ll be happy with it now. But the game was panned due to there not really being anything else to it. And after all these years and added mechanics there still sort of isn’t.
This game has added so many systems over the years, but it still just hasn’t really grown into anything of substance. It’s a game where the only real “thing to do” is mindless busywork. 200 new systems, all created to a standard of absolute minimum viability, none of them are very rewarding on their own, and none of them really create interesting interactions with each other. It’s like they every system was added with the idea that they’re optional, which makes them all feel unnecessary.
You can build bases now, but there’s no real reason to other than to do so. There are settlements you can become the leader of? But what that entails is essentially nothing. The game is designed from the ground up for you to move from planet to planet without lingering too long on any particular one, and yet they added a bunch of mechanics based around specific planets.
Plenty of EU countries export a significant portion of their extra-EU goods for export to the U.S. , many of which are around 20-25%. Ireland tops the charts with a whopping 46%.
Overall goods you’re still talking about ~10%. I’m sure that number will be shrinking substantially over the next decade.
The U.S. is the world’s largest consumer market by a factor of 3. So it’s more accurate to say “Give me what I want or I’ll take away a sizable chunk of your customers, potentially causing you financial ruin”
You and I both know that the U.S. won’t just magically and instantly stand up its own production to replace your countries market, but in this case he just needs American companies to start importing from a different foreign country with lower tariffs. The effect this has on your country depends on how much your country’s GDP comes from exports to America, but it’s potentially very harmful.
As an American this sucks because long term, long after this dude is gone, our trading partners will have already adjusted who they’re exporting to in order to absorb a loss like this, and I doubt that’d change for decades.
It’ll never really be a perfect drop in replacement because Docker relies on its daemon for a lot of functionality and Podman is daemonless, so you have to work around that. But like you said it’s just a matter of learning how things work with Portman.
The point was never that Anubis challenges are something scrapers can’t get past. The point is it’s expensive to do so.
Some bots don’t use JavaScript and can’t solve the challenges and so they’d be blocked, but there was never any point in time where no scrapes could solve them.
The original comment reply to me was all about how the legal system would act in the context of the CFAA specifically. And in that context that logic does not follow. Theres not much latitude for any judge to interpret the CFAA that way.
They could always push through some new law however.
I’m not saying courts couldn’t pass a new law saying whatever they want. But the laws we have today would not allow for ad blocking to be considered unauthorized access. Not under the CFAA as mentioned.
I said “The logic would not extend to that” not that a legal system could not act illogically.
That doesn’t make any logical sense. You cant tie legal authorization to an unsaid implicit assumption, especially when that is in turn based on what you do with the content you’ve retrieved from a system after you’ve accessed and retrieved it.
When you access a system, are you authorized to do so, or aren’t you? If you are, that authorization can’t be retroactively revoked. If that were the case, you could be arrested for having used a computer at a job, once you’ve quit. Because even though you were authorized to use it and your corporate network while you worked there, now that you’ve quit and are no longer authorized that would apply retroactively back to when you DID work there.
If I put a banner on my site that says "by visiting my site you agree not to modify the scripts or ads displayed on the site," does that make my visit with an ad blocker "unauthorized" under the CFAA?
How would you “authorize” a user to access assets served by your systems based on what they do with them after they've accessed them? That doesn’t logically follow so no, that would not make an ad blocker unauthorized under the CFAA. Especially because you’re not actually taking any steps to deny these people access either.
AI scrapers on the other hand are a type of users that you’re not authorizing to begin with, and if you’re using CloudFlares bot protection you’re putting into place a system to deny them access. To purposefully circumvent that access would be considered unauthorized.
That logic would not extend to ad blockers, as the point of concern is gaining unauthorized access to a computer system or asset. Blocking ads would not be considered gaining unauthorized access to anything. In fact it would be the opposite of that.
In the endless exploration, yes. In the myriad of other slapped together mechanics that don’t really tie into the exploration at all, no.
The exploration of new planets is well implemented, but that’s existed since the game launched. If you were happy with that then, you’ll be happy with it now. But the game was panned due to there not really being anything else to it. And after all these years and added mechanics there still sort of isn’t.