All of this is bullshit.

What made them “particularly liberal”? They were exporting their “prisoners” to the American colonies. They were still colonizing other territories, extending their reach. They were still selling African slaves via slave trade through The East India Trading Company. The Empire was in full swing by the 1600s, through the 1700s, well into the 1800s where they started to lose steam through the century.

I’ve argued pretty much all of this already. But, from the article:

Unfortunately, none of that is true. The three ships bringing tea into Boston Harbor, the Dartmouth, Eleanor and Beaver, were privately owned, colonial-built, colonial captained and crewed ships. They were transporting tea belonging to the East India Company, not the British government. The British government lost nothing monetarily.

The British East India Trading Company was a British Corporation and heavily influenced by The Crown / British Empire. It was used primarily to facilitate trade between all the British colonies and outposts. This isn’t even fringe history, which makes me believe that this article is not written in Good Faith.

This meant that imports would primarily be for the British Military Occupants and it’s ongoing war to expand Westward. The Colonists would have to barter with the British Occupants to get anything they wanted.

That’s the root cause of the unrest and eventual revolution. Independence from being under The British Empires thumb and allowing them to separate themselves as a new Nation. The tea was a play to encourage this change in that society, a new society that spanned ~150+ years away from Britain on new lands over a 1600-mile (2574 kilometers) landmass.

These articles always call them “smugglers” but what does that really mean? These people were born ON Americas soil and they were “smuggling” local trade to circumvent dealing with the British Occupants.

The British East India Trading Company was a oldtime Corporation and it certainly had a Monopoly on trade. Either you believe that Corporate and British Governmental Rule is a de facto good thing or you believe in Free Trade, but you can’t have it both ways in this time period.

To get out from under The British Empire, which is pretty understandable during the time period.

That description fits Boston perfectly. It was in the British empire, under the British crown, in a port city where the British ruled.

If you can’t tell the difference between the long-term British Surrounded and Integrated Livington and the Colonies growing apart from Britian across an entire Atlantic Ocean then there’s nothing to talk about. Boston was only like Liverpool in a sense that it was under British rule. Many of the people living and working in Boston weren’t even born on Great Britian soil and were born on Americas soil.

At this point, I don’t think you’re arguing in Good Faith.

Yes, just like there were rural areas in England, there were also rural areas in the colonies. There wasn’t much difference except the settlements in the Americas were newer.

Again, this is different than being an entire Ocean away, constantly dealing with British Militia Occupation over a span of ~150+ years.

Yes, Benjamin Franklin was really “roughing it” when he worked in various cities running a printing press. I’m sure he was out hunting and foraging all the time. There were people who lived in very rural areas in the colonies, but that’s also true of Great Britain.

Benjamin Franklin was not the norm. He was born into a family that already had a demanding industry running which gave him access to money and resources to go to school and live relatively comfortably. Just because the city had a printing press does not make it “modern”. This was not the norm for the time in the 1700s and especially for the majority of people living out on the East Coast for the last ~150 years.

Militias aren’t stationed places. Militias are called up as needed. I suspect you don’t know what a Militia is.

I suspect you understand what I mean when I say “The British Militia”, or maybe you’re not familiar with The British Empire, but you’re definitely being pedantic. You said yourself The British Empire was fighting a war to the West. They had to setup military bases to feed their war.

Yes, and? That doesn’t change that the primary beneficiaries of their plan to expand were the colonists who lived nearby. They weren’t doing it as a favour for the colonists, they were doing it as a strategic investment in the empire, of which the colonists were a part.

Clearly the colonists disagreed or there wouldn’t have been a revolution to begin with. Unless you think Antifa somehow got mixed into the ~1600 mile stretch of the East Coast and rallied the people against the Angels of the British Empire. The colonists no longer identified as British and wanted free of British rule and British Military Occupation. Again, something that has happened throughout history to the British Empire…

No it wasn’t. That’s the propaganda. The truth is that it was a revolution kicked off by the wealthy elite colonists who were greedy and didn’t want to have to share their wealth with the government. They wanted the benefits of the wars that Britain had fought to expand the empire’s reach in North America, without having to pay the bill or agree to the terms of the treaty that ended the war.

No that’s the propaganda you’re pushing because you think everything was just roses and jumpropes in the 1600s and 1700s. Your multiple comments give the impression that you believe everyone was living in cozy brick houses and got their food from the market. You seem to believe that this land was already cleared, explored, ready and waiting for the British to ship in their houses. Nobody believe that this was the case, but you won’t concede that people had to hunt and forage in a new land in which colonization is happening on new land? Get real.

The people growing up on that land, having to build their houses, having to build these towns, having to work in the area, these are the people who grew up away from Britian. These are the people who eventually got fed up with British Occupation and being under the British Empire’s thumb. Once again… Something that’s happened to The British throughout history…

According to John Adams, only about a third of the colonists were “Patriots”, or revolutionaries. The other two thirds were Loyalists or undecided. You’d think that if anything he’d be overestimating the number of “Patriots” to make it seem like there was more support for the war on his side.

Ya know I’ve read this and I think it tracks with how society goes. It certainly mirrors the U.S. political system pretty well since it’s a 2 party system (Patriots / Loyalists) and then there’s the undecided. I’d argue that’s the case in most 2 party systems. I don’t see this as the point you make it out to be, but a normal outcome to politics, and it’s especially surprising in a time with such slow communication (though when Adams says this, the Revolutionary War was already long past).

The “Loyalists” being those who wanted to stay within The Briths Empire.

The “Patriots” being those who wanted to be free of The British Empire.

The “Undecided” being those who just wanted to be left alone in the new land they’re exploring and homes they’re building for themselves.

The revolution succeeded because rich smugglers like John Hancock paid the bill, not because it had near universal support.

I don’t disagree with that. Most causes don’t have “universal support”, especially politically. That’s absurd.

No… as you might be able to tell from the name, the British East India company operated in… India.

The East India Trading Company came from the colonization of India and it’s base of operations was in fucking London during the period we’re discussing. This was an international shipping company used to facilitate trade between the British colonies, which included the American colonies, throughout the world. The British had a stranglehold, a Monopoly on trade at this time when dealing, especially when dealing with the American Colonies.

I don’t think you have a full understanding of how The British Empire used their wealth and power to try and colonize and influence the rest of the world. I don’t think you have a full grasp of how different the time period of the 1600s and 1700s is compared to modern day and what those people had to deal with as they were forming a new society on this new land. I don’t see any reason to keep discussing this topic with you, as you’re as stuck in your propaganda as I am apparently in mine.

Not your linked article, every time I try to get to it I receive 502 - Bad Gateway.

Operating in China and having 10% of your company publicly owned by an entity of the Chinese government are two different things

I don’t think it is. Steam operates in China and even allows China to censor the Steam store page and games as needed. Valve doesn’t take much issue bending over for China either in that regard. EGS and Steam are both Corporations and China is a large market.

And the cherry on top is their close relationship with tencent, aka one facet of the propaganda arm of the CCP.

I see this a lot and… do they though? From what I can tell, Steam also operates in China. Sure, Tencent invested in EGS, but not in any kind of controlling stake. Tencent does invest in tech and EGS is probably a solid investment.

How do you think it happened in Liverpool and Manchester? People moved there and built up a town.

Under the British Empire, The British Crown, as a port city, where The British primarily ruled. This is a bit different than when The British Empire was across an entire Atlantic Ocean.

Their grandparents did, sure. By the time they were born these were established colonies and it wasn’t too different from Europe.

Not everything was Boston and established, flushed out colonies with paved streets and whatnot. Just because “Their grandparents” hunted, farmed, and build lodging doesn’t make their children’s lives much different during those times. It was still very much roughing it, especially the more lower class you get. They still had to hunt, farm, forage, build, and work.

Militia members were locals.

British Militia were stationed there like any other wartime, but they were still loyalists to the British Empire, whereas society at that time was clearly moving away from Britain’s control over the communities.

You do realize that the colonists were fighting in the wars, and many of the wars were fought on behalf of the colonists, to protect them from the hostile French and “Indian” forces to their west, right?

You do realize that this wasn’t some nice thing Britain was doing for the people wanting to leave Britain and had more to do with the British Empire trying to expand their reach over The World as they did in Africa and India? This is what The British did at the time, expansion and conquering through colonization.

Yeah, just like the idiotic sovereign citizens today who don’t want to acknowledge that they’re part of a society and that they have to live by the rules of that society like everyone else. They didn’t like the government’s rules so they smuggled.

A small group of smugglers didn’t just start a Revolution across roughly ~1500 miles of the Americas East Coast on their own. This was a social change driven by that society’s desire to be rid of British Occupation and Governance. Otherwise, this “revolution” would have fizzled without ongoing support, much like the “sovereign citizen” movement has.

and the upcharges from The East India Trading Corporation - who were relatively loyal to The British Militia. WTF are you talking about?

During this period, with the British waging war and needing supplies (along with colonies needing supplies), this was primarily handled by The East India Trading Company to handle shipments and imports - this was more or less controlled by The British Empire. This meant that the local populace would need to trade and barter with the Trading Company, who favored The British Militia, which meant less fair trade/barter.

What do you mean by “the annexation of the British Empire”? The British Empire was never annexed.

Annexation in that after the American Revolution and the British Surrender, this allowed the newly formed society to be separated entirely from the British Empire and British Militia. The colonies would no longer be under British Militia control and the society would be free to formulate it’s own government and trade.

And yet, it didn’t happen, probably because there was constant contact and trade back and forth between British ports in the Americas, British ports in Asia, British ports in Europe, etc.

Now it just seems like you’re suggesting that Britain never released its control and influence over America, which I can’t agree with. America certainly grew up into a society different than Britain, certainly the revolt and removal of British Militia has apart in this.

I mentioned this in a more fleshed out comment, but I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. This was the annexation of The British Empire from a forming society over a century and a half. During which the local populace would have to deal with British Militia and The East India Trading Corporation who were more loyal at the time to The British.

I think the internet and foreign interference also make it a bit more complicated than that.

I don’t think the GoG numbers matter, and I do think Steam’s days are numbered if they continue on their current course (like, within the next 50 years, not tomorrow, but in my lifetime). GoGs DRM free and game archive mantra is going to give them longevity. The World continues to digitize, and eventually, society is going to have to grapple with Internet privacy and digital ownership. Steam on the otherhand is catering to the same crowd EGS is at a 30% tax. No doubt Steam has the numbers, no doubt they will for awhile, but I do think they will eventually run out of Steam if they don’t invest in a more sustainable business model.

To be clear, I don’t hate Steam or am in any way rooting against Steam, this is just my PoV in comparing their business model to EGS who has primarily invested in their UE5 engine. Valve on the otherthand does well with hardware, Steamdeck and SteamVR I think are both solid.

I also don’t believe that EGS is as bad as a company as people make them out to be.

Could you point to these games or any documentation on how a developer may reach out to Valve regarding developing in the Source 2 Engine?

I was able to find sources for the Source engine, but not Source 2 which Valve has been primarily making games on in the last 10 years. In any case, neither are as widely supported or available as UE5.

Leaving the British empire has happened a lot. Fighting a war to leave definitely hasn’t. Which other countries have fought wars to leave the British Empire?

1. The Irish War of Independence (Ireland)
2. The Indiain Rebellion (India)
3. The North-West Rebellion (French/Canaidan)
4. Mau Mau rebellion (Kenya)
5. Baptist War (Jamaica)

This isn’t even a full list, and not all of these were successful, but they were all fights against British Occupation. Being in The British Empire wasn’t all roses…

That’s what the propaganda sells, but it’s not true. Boston was as big a town as Liverpool in the 1700s. New York was roughly the same size as Manchester. Nobody was “literally fighting the environment to survive”. People had city-type jobs. Benjamin Franklin was printing newspapers. John Hancock was a smuggler. Sure, there were a lot of farmers working hard on their farms, but that was true everywhere.

How do you think all this happened? The cities just got shipped in from across the Atlantic? That’s the whole point of Britians expansion with the Thirteen Colonies across the East Coast of Americas - multiple attempts at forming and sustaining a base of operations to further expansions. It starts in the early 1600s, continues into the 1700s as ships continue to drop off both British Separists - those wanting to seek life in a new land - and British Militia. All of which had to build these cities to handle the import of goods needed for the British Empires expansion. It’s not some Game of Thrones shit where a fleet of British ships just completely encompass the East Coast and supply it with everything it needs. Ain’t no next day shipping in these days. Both Populace and Supplies would continue to come in through the century. These people had to explore, farm, forage, hunt, build shelter all in new land. Port cities would have been the first places to see the most improvement simply due to location and imports - again over 100 years, ~166 years from first landing a East Coast Colony to The Boston Tea Party.

John Handcock was born on Americans soil (not a British Separatist Import) and arguably had more right to the land and representation there of than the British Militia. He wasn’t some off-shore Chinese smuggler trying to undercut The East India Trading Corporation. The propaganda is framing local trade is “smuggling” when in reality, the locals who grew up in The Americas, building the city, not fighting The British Empires war, got fed up having to deal with trading through The British and the upcharges from The East India Trading Corporation - who were relatively loyal to The British Militia.

The annexation of the British Empire has happened in more places than just the Americas - history shows that it was inevitable. A century and a half (over 150 years) is a long time for a society to grow apart from The British Empire across The Atlantic Ocean.

I find it strange that you think GOG has a better business model than Steam and will be more competitive long-term. Why do you think so?

Steam is it’s own DRM system. Control (2020) is a perfect example. You can’t run that from your steamapps folder due to Steams DRM to verify a purchase license. GoG on the other hand has the same game, usually cheaper, an runs entirely independent of any platform. Not every Steam game is like this, but most major releases are.

The nice thing about a “Free” Engine is that anyone can pick it up. This means the more people pick it up, the more tutorials, the more docs, the most common issues are found, the more common solutions, etc. So while you believe that performance is an issue, it really is one of the better available engines out there and it can only get better. Again, Steam does not let other people use their Engine - what’s the next best free thing - Unity?

A lot of Steam Stans here.

Here’s some neat facts:

• Epic Games is the same Source Developers behind Unreal Engine 5. UE5 is arguably the best game engine right now for modern graphics.
• Epic Games Unreal Engine 5 is Free to start developing and only kicks in commission after X% of sales.
• Both Steam and GoG take a ~30% commission on all game sales.
• Steam games aren’t DRM-free (neither is EGS, but 0% + the driving force behind UE5?)
• The Steam Source 2 Engine is proprietary; only their team can develop Source games.

It sucks that EGS is looking to suck up games, customers, data, etc. Their App / Interface also kinda sucks. UE5 on the other hand kinda rules, and Steam has been quietly collecting cheques while their Source Engine has collected dust. Almost all my games are on Steam but the ones I want to keep I’ve been getting through GoG.

GoG I think has a solid business model of DRM free games and game preservation. EGS is leading in one of the industry’s most innovative and developer-accessible game engines for the foreseeable future. Steam is going to have to make some tough decisions I think to compete as time goes on.

I don’t interpret the history like that, and really, it’s not that long ago. I think it’s a relatable situation to empathize with. The way you’ve presented things assumes that everyone there was British and there was an outlying cast of “rebels and smugglers”.

My interpretation is that this was a group of people forming their own society on a new land away from Britain. We’re talking from Jamestown in 1607, through the British separatist colonizing the rest of the American East Coast to 1732 (Georgia, last of the 13 British separatist colonies). That’s over a 100 years of people forming a new society, on new land, literally fighting the environments day in and day out to survive.

During this time, we have The British Military setting up bases, trying to further their Nations expanse westward. In the mix we have one of the first Corporations, being used by the British Military - The East India Trading Company, to facilitate trade between the British Militants and what I’ll call Locals. The British Military gets priority on Imports, and the Locals either barter with the British Military installations or The East India Trading Company. Local Communities integrating trade as an alternative short The British Militia which results in the Townsend Acts of 1767. This allows British Militia involvement for what they see as “smugglers” and results in confiscation of goods, to support British Militia.

The Boston Tea Party (1773, 166 years after the first long-term colony") sets in motion a society’s separation from British Occupants leading to The Revolutionary War of 1775 resulting in separation from The British Empire. I think it was an inevitable thing to happen as it’s happened throughout history to The British Empire. As one would expect, this was literal Independence allowing the growing society to facilitate their own means, government, trade, and communities. Coincidentally, they inherited a similar civil governing structure as the base sauce was the same.

TL;DR: I don’t see this as greed but growth, separation, and annexation of The British Empire (Authoritarian) + East India Trading Company (Trade Monopoly Corporation).

What formed at the end of the day is Capitalism. For me, that leads me to believe that either International Trade or the Governing Body eventually leads to Capitalism. For me, I think it’s the latter. This is the same Governing body inherited from The British Empire and adapted in it’s own unique ways over a large geographical area. This Governing body mixed with the International Trade and humans susceptibility to greed has lead to U.S. Capitalism. I’m not necessarily sold on Capitalism being a bad concept, but the Governing Body has to be a check for the people and the Nation. What the U.S. has grown into is unchecked Capitalism, which could flip to full Authoritarianism if the inequality gap gets too big.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Absolutely batffling…

This is a group of people who feel they’ve been unfairly made fun of for too long finally getting their revenge.