Enshittification… enshittification everywhere
Unity Silently Deletes GitHub Repo that Tracks Terms of Service Changes and Updated Its License - GamerBraves
Submitted 1 year ago by tst123@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
db2@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Exactly, everyone seems to be jumping in the bandwagon these days. Makes me wonder if it was part of the plan from day one of the web 2.0.
send_me_your_ink@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
The cheap money is gone. Now suddenly companies need to find profit to satisfy investors.
swnt@feddit.de 1 year ago
ooffff
Strepto@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Are they just hoping that literally no publisher will legally challenge these terms? You can’t just change the terms retroactively without consent and start charging people whatever you want. They’ll lose the instant someone takes them to court over it
mojo@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Especially when there’s a lot of high profile clients who’s business literally relies on them. They will absolutely have a ton of lawsuits coming towards them. Good, fuck them for thinking they could, or should, ever do this.
jcg@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’m sure if this actually pushes through they’ll change the terms for those clients just to keep them happy (and paying what they do pay, which likely dwarfs all the smaller players). And they sure as shit won’t fight for the smaller creators when they get theirs.
TheBlue22@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The challenged Microsoft. Fucking MICROSOFT. They are completely and utterly fucked
Railcar8095@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Let’s not forget Nintendo too. Their layers haven’t ruined someone’s life in at least a week, so they are thirsty for blood.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Isn’t this action (removal of the git repo) essentially an admission that:
- Unity is doing something shady;
- Unity knows it’s doing something shady
- Unity knows when the public sees what they’re doing what they’re doing, it’ll be recognized as totally something shady?
rustyfish@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The more I read about this mess, the more I believe this is the work of one or multiple CEOs who have absolutely no clue about the field they are in and started giving orders.
You know what kind of boss I mean. That kind who can’t handle a NO and throws a fit every time they are proven wrong. But people still do as they will, because they are disgusting people and you are already in talks with a new workplace.
Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 year ago
I’ve been suspecting this is one of those “do 200% horrible damages but increases revenue (or at least make the company seem more profitable)” then have a “management change” that comes in as the savoir but they only roll back 10% of the changes to show they’ve fixed things.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Beast Rabban --> Feyd-Rautha
anlumo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What’s weird to me is that CEOs should know all about accounting and financials. He should have realized that this pricing model is unsustainable for most Unity developers, because many make less than what he’s asking for per install themselves.
It’s clear that professional CEOs don’t know anything about tech, but this isn’t a tech issue.
Whiskey@reddthat.com 1 year ago
I bet he justified it saying something cliche like gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette.
BURN@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They absolutely do know. They’re well aware of the impact this will have on small devs. That was their goal. They want to price out those free or low cost games that use Unity and never make a profit to avoid paying royalty fees.
This wasn’t incompetence. It’s straight up malice.
Mikina@programming.dev 1 year ago
Their CEO is the guy who was leading Electronic Arts when it was voted the worst company of the year, implemented first lootboxes and who was openly suggesting to charge people real money per reload.
And009@reddthat.com 1 year ago
crowning shit, should be his ign
andy_wijaya_med@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The problem is, I don’t think the CEO would be in anyway getting the consequences of their actions. Of the company is sinking, they will just “be fired” and get those extra money (like huge amount of money). The company will close and announce bankruptcy. The “person” isn’t punished.
luthis@lemmy.nz 1 year ago
I’m already switching to Godot.
hal_5700X@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Here’s link to it, godotengine.org
Justas@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
luthis@lemmy.nz 1 year ago
Well it’s good to know I don’t have to start from scratch. I’ll take a look, thanks!
DeadNinja@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Reddit, Xwitter, Unity…what next in the queue of “let me fuck myself” ?
dorron@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Shout out to Postman who this week decided to depreciate their local (secure) credential storage scratchpad, to force people to use their API and store everything on their cloud platform
blog.postman.com/announcing-new-lightweight-postm…
Global enshitification continues
BURN@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Postman got flagged as no longer safe to use on corporate hardware after this. Sounds like it’s time to go back to using curl for everything.
UnD3Rgr0uNDCL0wN@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You forgot Youtube/Google and Facebook who’ve been arseholes for years.
DeadNinja@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Nope, I didn’t. But they all being A-holes, show no sign of digging their own graves like Reddit, X, and Unity did.
Guess they are supervillains then, lol.
anteaters@feddit.de 1 year ago
That sounds like a company I want to completely rely on to develop a product, a company and my whole dev career.
Haywire@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Like the kid that took his ball and went home and then is surprised that nobody wants to play with him.
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Now the clause is completely absent in any of the new ToS, which means that users are obligated to any changes Unity made to their services regardless of version numbers including pricing updates such as the recent fee that will charge developers per game install.
No, it doesn’t. Just because Unity decide to update the terms and conditions does not mean that users are obligated to accept new terms.
UnspecificGravity@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Getting rid of the previous versions just makes it harder for unity to enforce any terms on previously signed agreements.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
It’s akin to a TV comedy when someone grabs a contract and eats it thinking it will void the contract. If they do try to sue anyone using older versions with that TOS, it should be fun to see how it plays out in court.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
So unity too hired a few managers who want to make a quick buck, get a good bonus and then leave unity before it’s the burning husk that will be left once this is all said and done.
andy_wijaya_med@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yup. I think the “person” should be held accountable for their actions. The company would die, but the CEO would still get so much money out of this situation.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What’s with these companies going full-evil all of a sudden.
Restaldt@lemm.ee 1 year ago
The infinite money dried up. Now they are out of ideas on how to make a profit because they werent before.
derpgon@programming.dev 1 year ago
Also investors pushing for higher profit margins. Unity is publicly traded company.
hackitfast@lemmy.world 1 year ago
So the companies “aren’t making enough money”, which means they don’t have enough to pay us, which means we don’t have enough to spend on them.
Hmm.
Fluid@aussie.zone 1 year ago
Others did it and faced no consequences. No government step-in, no mass customer loss. When there are no consequences for greedy monopolistic behaviours, greedy monopolies act greedily. Welcome to market capitalism without proper regulation.
darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
[deleted]CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 year ago
To be fair it does seem like there’s some kind of coordinated effort going on.
starman@programming.dev 1 year ago
Wait 'till Musk buys it and renames to Xunity
blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Ain’t that his kid’s name?
orrk@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Xnity
ZeroCool@feddit.ch 1 year ago
Xnity
That’s a good way to end up getting Xued by Comcast Xfinity
Raxiel@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Xity, the home of Xity business practices.
Ghostbanjo1949@lemmy.mengsk.org 1 year ago
I don’t see how any of this would hold up in court. I’m pretty sure you can’t be liable for a new tos for what is essentially new software that you didn’t use in your project. This company is clearly run by fucktards who are hoping to prey upon devs that just don’t know better or can’t fight back.
BURN@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The Unity Runtime (Basicallt the core of the engine) is technically licensed as a subscription. So when the free license renews, this is included in the new ToS and it’ll be a lot harder to fight.
Invertedouroboros@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Obviously not a lawyer, but I’m not 100% certain that the billing terms would stand up to legal scrutiny. It’s been kinda hard to keep up with this story so my apologies if any of this is wrong, but I believe that they said they were wanting to use an “aggregate proprietary model” to determine downloads. What that basically means (I think) is “we’ll tell you how much you have to pay us but we can’t independently justify any individual charge”.
Again, I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know of anything off the top of my head that’d make that illegal, but it also doesn’t really feel like it’d square with how things work. I mean if companies could just make up a number and say you owe them that much without being able to say why or whether or not that number comports in any way with reality, then what’s stopping every company from doing that? What’s stopping a magazine for example from coming back to you and saying “Yes, you paid us for the magazine. But our proprietary aggregate model that totally reflects reality promise tm suggests that you might have shown that magazine to two or three other people after you purchased it from us. So that means you have to pay us three instances of the review licence fee.”?
I don’t know. Obviously this is all scuzzy and morally wrong. It’s just that even factoring in that this is a subscription service and that they are a corporation with an army of lawyers who’ll likely win any challenge to it, I can’t really shake the feeling that there’s something fundamentally legally wrong about that aspect of it in particular that wouldn’t hold up in court. Even for them.
dinckelman@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Corporations might have an iron grip over basically everything in our life, reducing our choices to a minimum, out of necessity, but the fact that they think we’re stupid too, is actually astounding
tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
In many cases the have not been proven wrong.
Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Sounds like Elon is running the company now
ahriboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Or it could be someone who worked for EA before.
Mikina@programming.dev 1 year ago
John Riccitiello is an American business executive who is chief executive officer (CEO) of Unity Technologies. Previously, he served as CEO, chief operating officer and president of Electronic Arts…
Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev 1 year ago
Is it that hard for a group of devs to get together and build an Open Source alternative to Unity?
NichtGanzSoGut@feddit.de 1 year ago
It’s not, there is Godot github.com/godotengine/godot
Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Tho godot is majourly funded through grants right now (so they have some full time devs), shows how its even more important to donate!
iegod@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Go is pretty dope to work with. There are a few other engine projects available too, like ebiten. ebitengine.org
adriaan@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
It is difficult though. Godot has been in development since 2007. It was not FOSS until 2014. It is still way behind Unity and Unreal Engine in many ways, which have been around since 2004 and 1995 respectively.
ICastFist@programming.dev 1 year ago
As others pointed out, alternatives already exist. Besides Godot and ebiten, there’s also Stride, which focuses on 3D.
Now, an Open Source alternative that is compatible with Unity, similar to what EnigmaGM offers as a counter to GameMaker (and, in a similar vein, FPC Lazarus vs. Embarcadero Delphi), would require a fuckload of work and people with the skills to make it work.
dyma@lemmy.world 1 year ago
yes, game engines are highly complex programs with decades of development, problem solving, and bug squashing under their belt. Fortunately there’s about to be high demand for a foss engine so I imagine Godot will get pretty good, but it’s got a long way to go.
operetingushisutemu@feddit.de 1 year ago
Just out of interest, what are the shortcomings of Godot?
hal_5700X@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The trash fire rises.
peyotecosmico@programming.dev 1 year ago
stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world 1 year ago
How do I get in contact with these people to let them know how fucking corrupt they are
GGiuliano93@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What a bunch of clowns, jeez.
pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
this: ufile.io/fh63w3e0
mlg@lemmy.world 1 year ago
On a sort of unrelated note, I always hated unity as a game engine anyway.
Many years back we had this big 2 month long project for a class and we had decided to develop a game.
We settled on a spinoff of advance wars with some additional vehicles and mechanics.
We decided to try unity since it was reccomended by literally everybody.
After 2 days of using the crappy UI, getting flashbanged by the free light mode, and pulling our hair out over scripting, we said screw it and just made a bespoke engine with SDL because no one knew opengl or vulkan and we didn’t want to try another engine.
That was also the day we realized how much nicer C was to C++ lmao. Objects were nice, but we were so ready to redo the whole thing in C with structs and functions.
Game came out pretty nice though.
mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 year ago
How in the world did they think no one would notice? Aren’t they a tech savvy company?
pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
this: ufile.io/fh63w3e0
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7933449/Screen_Shot_2017_02_05_at_11.21.48_AM.png){kind=link}
Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
What a bunch of maroons. 99.9% chance someone else mirrored that git repo.
Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
True, maybe, but in this case entirely pointless. If Unity didn’t host on git, they would’ve hosted it on their own solution. They would’ve been able to delete the repo just the same. Furthermore, if they hosted the solution on their own, it would’ve made it harder for others to mirror the repo. At least harder as git makes it.
Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Fair enough… archive.is and other solutions then to capture their pages before/after changes.
sfgifz@lemmy.world 1 year ago
To be fair, this is a feature not a bug. The original creator is the one who taketh away.
Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
True, generally. Unless DMCA notices force github to taketh away for them… :) youtube-dl and others found out.
Qvest@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Say no to centralized platforms altogether. I don’t want to be that person, but things like these are exactly why open-source is (and should be) superior. It’s unfortunate that OSS has had so little traction in the end-user side of things
AdmiralShat@programming.dev 1 year ago
That’s changing, imo. For years, closed source software built by companies was just superior in I’d say 80% of cases (Image editing, DAWs, 3D graphics (remember, blender may be getting up their in age, but it only recently hit parity with other major softwares)
I feel like now I’m using more open source software than not, not out of a personal belief, but because it’s actually better now than some of the closed source alternatives (price is not an issue with me, I’m gonna pirate whatever I want to use anyway)
elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What’s the point of having an outdated copy of the ToS? Unity did this just so that it’s not so easy to see future changes.
Raxiel@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Users are bound by the version of the terms they agree with when they start using the product. There may be a term that says ongoing usage when the terms change constitutes acceptance of a change.
Unity are trying to say they can make the change retroactively, but the 2022 (and prior) terms apparently included a clause saying that if future changes were detrimental to the user they could stay on old versions of the software and remain bound by the old terms. That’s one angle Devs could use to tell them to get fucked There may be others.
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Mirror a git repo? Do you understand how git works? You clone the repo, and it’s effectively mirrored already, especially for something that doesn’t change much.
If you want the commits updated, then put
git pullin a daily cronjob. Boom! Mirror.Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
True, every git pull is a ‘mirror’. Bad phrasing on my part. I was thinking more of when I set up my local gogs instance to mirror an outside/upstream git (such as from github), which really just pulls again every time upstream changes.