At this point I'm pretty sure this is a dishonest attempt to dig up a 2020 change (if this clause even ever existed, which I've seen zero proof of) and correlate it to a 2023 announcement as if these things were done in tandem.
Downvote me all you want. I don't think Godot et al will survive with these scummy tactics.
I have never seen a Unity TOS that specified versions as seen in the screenshot of the link you shared. Where did they get that screenshot from? They need to share their source. For all we know this is a change from 2020 (latest version referred to in their screenshot).
In which case I think you will agree that is plenty of notice and most likely unrelated to be maliciously related to what's being announced now. They've even walked back the applicability to old versions as seen in GP.
> If they are willing to retroactively change the TOS once, why wouldn't they do it again once the smoke has settled?
I haven't seen any evidence they did that, it's mostly been FUD from Godot supporters. The initial communication was messy, but where are actual TOS changes that are being touted so loudly?
I’ve written several books using Foam and VScode and I avoid those communities like the plague precisely because they love the tool more than the problems it solves.
I’ve also published (and maintain) several websites using special tags and Hugo tools that compile to HTML markup complete with the requisite hyperlinks and attachments.
I don’t like Obsidian much, personally. I love to customize my tools just enough to get them out of the way.
Looks like you know a lot about F2P games, can you help me understand this fee in the context of other variables such as cost of customer acquisition? Is that usually a much lower amount than 20 cents? What about 2 cents, which would be the cost on a pro license, which most successful F2P devs would assuredly be able to afford?
I’m hoping you can answer these with concrete data. If that’s not possible, could you share your references?
> It's incomprehensible to me how gullible people are around AI today -- the Eliza effect coupled with a pseudoscientific impulse to "whatever appears to work".
Incomprehensible perhaps, but not even a smidge unpredictable. You knew exactly what you would find in this comment thread.
If they do that and it can be proven they did that, they can end up in a bad place. However, it does happen that the owner finds out too late in the first place. In those cases they usually gain a new construction...
You don't have to put yourself down to have an open mind or a beginner's mind. Realistically you are aware that you are not below average in all contexts, no? So what does it mean to tell yourself otherwise? False humility? Self deprecation? Doesn't seem very healthy.
As the other commenters said, it's about testing your palate vs. your tongue. I made a mistake in my original comment where I said you don't have a sense of taste without smell, I meant to say you have only taste (sweet, sour, salty, bitter, umami) absent the flavors your olfactory equipment provides.
Get some (sugar free) rose water [0] and drink it. Compare with water. If they taste the same, you might be missing out on a lot of taste (but you will still be able to taste, say, salt vs. sweet).
More simply put though, if you definitely don't have a sense of smell, you most likely don't have a sense of taste either. I lost my sense of smell due to Covid for a bit, so I have some first-hand experience.
> AWS is _extremely_ customer friendly and if this happened would likely be offering dedicated support to make it right, credits for the business loss, etc.
It doesn't take much legwork to find counterexamples of that claim, even on HN (see below, I spent 2 minutes searching to find those).
> Google's customer service is the worst I've experienced in the industry (like even speaking to a person is hard). While AWS is some of the best I've received.
This is a bit too hyperbolic for me, but on balance I agree that Amazon has better customer experience than Google. That doesn't really answer what GP is asking, especially given all the posts made about AWS on this very forum that only sometimes get attention.
I did find the TOS in question, as expected, it's very old (from 2019):
https://web.archive.org/web/20201111183311/https://github.co...
So people saying "who's to say they won't do this again," if four years isn't enough for you to catch up, I don't know what to tell you.
Edit: They have also brought the repo back, which was likely another unrelated change:
https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/TermsOfService