Comment on PlayStation keeps reminding us why digital ownership sucks
Pohl@lemmy.world 9 months agoThis is the most insane false equivalence I have seen in this thread.
The point is that some providers of digital goods have already surpassed reasonable expectations, and some fall very short. 20yrs of support for a video game on any format is really great. Any thing past that I think belongs in the preservation category which is the responsibility of libraries and archivists, not publishers.
Returning to your house analogy, when your 20yr old furnace fails, do you call the builder and expect him to fix it for free? When you clog the toilet do you plunge it yourself or does somebody owe that to you as condition of the sale? At some point everything you buy reaches the end of its useful life. What makes people thing digital goods should last until the sun burns out?
shrugal@lemm.ee 9 months ago
I removed the comment because what I was criticizing in it wasn’t necessarily said in the one it was answering, but I do still think the comparison is adequate!
There is no reason for digital content to ever go bad, other than not having any compatible physical devices anymore. Idk what you base your “reasonable expectation” on, but properly stored digital content does not degrade, so it could last basically forever. I guess you just extrapolate from what you’re used to from these platforms, and I’m sorry to tell you that they’ve been ripping you off the whole time. There is no physical reason why they couldn’t keep the digital content available, at least until they go out of business. Hosting static data is incredibly cheap, the limitations are all about contracts and money making.
If anything, the house in the metaphor is actually not long-lived enough.