And then double down on those choices. Their play book seems to consist of:

• Doing something awful
• Getting callled out and immediately doubling down on their awful choice
• Attempt to re-frame said choice as their toughness that “snowflakes” couldn’t understand
• Then finally to just embrace the fact that they and their followers are just worthless people with very limited morals. Somehow this is also viewed as strength to them.

I second this. Anyone who says “You get what you pay for” is either trying to sell you something OR they themself are a sucker. Sure, sometimes** you get what you pay for but plenty of other times you’re getting straight up ripped off because the seller realizes you’ll mistake price with quality. Don’t be anyones sucker.

Me as well

I’d call them all Snoopy considering the very legitimate privacy concerns.

Has anyone seen the 80’s animated series The Mysterious Cities of Gold? It took me forever to find it and before I did I started doubting if it even existed or if I made it all up in my head. It takes place in the 1500’s and it follows this group that is looking for the lost cities of gold. At some point early on they find an ancient aircraft that is made of solid gold, solar powered and in the shape of a giant condor.

This was released on the original PlayStation and definitely available in English. I remember it being a very cool game.

They were originally going to call the Nintendo 64 the Ultra 64. That’s about as mega as it gets.

I’m starting to think you’re a bot. You most definitely said it was fraud to the user. No, I’m not going to go buy a mechanical blueray player and then try to figure out how to rip that content to be able to use it how I want. If you think anyone is really going to follow your needlessly complicated advice then you’re in for a rude awakening. You can keep beating this drum all day long but your attitude (and Sonys) is why piracy is going up. If you want to hang on the “you agreed to it” bull then then that’s up to you. More and more people are done caring though and there is nothing you can say to change that. Companies that put out crap terms are getting what they deserve. Your solution is no solution. Buying physical media in 2023 is just not acceptable.

I really don’t know why you’re going so far out of your way to defend a company that you yourself just said is commiting fraud. I know you probably think you’re actually making a case against piracy and not for Sony but in reality you’re putting in a lot of work into making Sony’s case for them. Your argument is that if a company is able to slip a gotcha past a dumb customer then it’s the customer’s fault for not noticing. You’re acting like there’s an alternative when there is not. Giving up on music is not an alternative, all digital content outlets seem to do this and who even owns a means to play physical media anymore? Considering there is no technical reason a company would need to revoke a digital license I’d say morally there’s nothing wrong with getting that content back in a way that does no harm to the license provider. That is unless you believe that not buying it twice somehow harms the company you’ve already paid. I’d further argue that if a company is willing to engage in fraud (your words) then that company is not ethical. A company that behaves unethically should have no expectations of their customers to behave ethically in return. You said people should stop agreeing to ludicrous terms. So long as these companies are issuing terms that you say no one should agree to I’d say piracy is completely justified from a moral standpoint. If they don’t like it then they should quit providing dubious terms and instead provide a reasonable option for a legal purchase.

Because banks have kept antiquated policies that go back to a time before computers for no other reason other than that it makes them a lot of money. At some point in history your bank account ledger would have been kept hand written on paper that folded out to what they called (get this) a spreadsheet. Each ledger would have been kept at the single branch where the account was opened. Another branch across town would have no idea what your balance was so they would have to accept charges before physically mailing it to your local branch for processing. If the payment didn’t clear but the bank had already paid on your behalf then it made sense to charge a fine.
These days literally the only reason for a bank to let an account overdraw is because it makes them a lot of money. They don’t care that they are getting rich off of the poorest among us. In my eyes they’re no better than sleazy payday loan centers.