this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
272 points (84.7% liked)

Technology

85694 readers
3476 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chozo@fedia.io 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Now, I'm willing to change my view if there's ever a situation in which Gabe Newall is intentionally trying to avoid paying taxes, but that hasn't happened yet.

What about exploiting child gambling? Valve's value, and thusly Gabe's value, skyrocketed after introducing lootboxes to TF2, CSGO, DOTA2, etc. He can be as charitable as he fucking wants, but he still defends lootboxes while taking little to no efforts to ensure that children aren't gambling on his platform. He's had... how many years to fix this problem now? Too many. He's not fixed the problem, and continues to reap the rewards in the meantime.

As far as I'm concerned, he's just as much of a piece of shit as any other billionaire. The only difference is that he makes toys that a lot of us really, really like; toys that we apparently like so much so that we're willing to handwave child gambling as long as it doesn't get in the way of making it moderately convenient to download DRM-infested games.

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago (15 children)

Mate, I did not know parents were not responsible for their own children. That is on me. I'm glad to hear all the work I've done on my network and computers to make them safe for my children was a moot point.

Adults like gambling. It's not Valve's fault that children are using it cause their parents are ignorant of their own child.

As far as the DRM stuff goes, that's all based on the publisher. And it's not that difficult to bypass. Valve has shown time and time again, that they are a business for their customers. Their customers like a solid platform that works and is easy to use and has a community.

Let's take a look a Linux real quick. If it wasn't for Valve, Linux gaming wouldn't be what it is today. They did that and gave it to the community. I'm sorry other platforms can't be bothered to put in that kind of effort. If you wanna play with the big dogs, you gotta get off the porch. And Ubisoft wants to take the easy way out through a lawsuit. They need to do better with their storefront. Offer good exclusives. Try to actually appeal to your customers.

I still remember when everybody bitched about Steam when half-life 2 came out. It was kinda bad, and people were mad about it. But Valve was just ahead of the curve. It allowed them to publish updates, patches, anti-cheating. And soon enough, the community grew to love it. It just worked. If something broke in your game, it was probably fixed in a week if it was a Valve game. It gave so much to PC players.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Adults like gambling. It’s not Valve’s fault that children are using it cause their parents are ignorant of their own child.

If adults want to gamble, fine. Let's enforce gambling laws and get this over with. It would also solve the children gambling problem because that would be illegal. But this is why Valve's gambling service is indefensible. Valve is actively trying to prevent the gambling classification because if it gets treated like actual gambling it most likely stops being profitable. I don't necessarily have an issue with gambling, I have an issue with it not being treated as gambling. And all the other things Valve has done that have been positive for gaming do not justify giving Valve a free pass on gambling.

To bring it back to Gaben, he isn't avoiding taxes but he is avoiding the (gambling) law because it makes him more money, so is it that different from avoiding taxes?

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That is a fair point. However, I must ask, what is the different between what Valve is doing with loot boxes v. every single trading card game out there. MTG, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh, or Disney's Lorcana? You are purchasing an item that has items in it that are random. The only reason they have value is because people have the option to just buy skin they want on Valve's marketplace. Just like people have the option to buy a specific Pokémon card from a third party.

The other thing that Valve has done is, there's no inherent value to the item. You can sell items for Steam Wallet funds, to then use in the marketplace. So, to me it seems, it's really easy to set up a Steam account to not be allowed to purchase items. Which would include adding money to a Steam wallet for the marketplace. So, no this is not a "think of the children" issue. It's yet again, another people are bad parents and can't be bothered to use parental controls on their children's electronics. Or take steps to prevent them from spending real money. Or take steps to prevent them from playing too much.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

That is a fair point. However, I must ask, what is the different between what Valve is doing with loot boxes v. every single trading card game out there. MTG, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh, or Disney’s Lorcana? You are purchasing an item that has items in it that are random. The only reason they have value is because people have the option to just buy skin they want on Valve’s marketplace. Just like people have the option to buy a specific Pokémon card from a third party.

I don't see how that matters at this point, you've already called it gambling. Are you going to walk that back to defend Valve? After all the only reason to bring up this point is to claim it's not actually gambling. And to address your point, yes I also consider MTG, Pokemon and most trading card games the physical equivalent of a lootbox and a form of gambling. I also know they're not gambling in a legal sense but we'll get to where Valve differs in the next part.

The other thing that Valve has done is, there’s no inherent value to the item. You can sell items for Steam Wallet funds, to then use in the marketplace. So, to me it seems, it’s really easy to set up a Steam account to not be allowed to purchase items. Which would include adding money to a Steam wallet for the marketplace. So, no this is not a “think of the children” issue. It’s yet again, another people are bad parents and can’t be bothered to use parental controls on their children’s electronics. Or take steps to prevent them from spending real money. Or take steps to prevent them from playing too much.

Actually that's no longer true and that's why there was a lawsuit filed against Valve at the start of this year. The items now have a value because you sell the things to get Steam credit and then use Steam credit to buy a Steam Deck and then sell the Deck for real money. It's no longer a closed system, you can get the money out. And once again, this wouldn't be an issue if Valve either a) stopped their gambling or b) adhere to gambling laws.

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Holy fuck, didn't realize so many kids were buying and selling steam decks. Damn, got me. I admit defeat. Later, friend.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh yeah, strawman the fuck out of my argument, that'll definitely show me.

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ugh, fine. The lawsuit is gonna bust because there's too many steps to exchange the wallet into cash. Most notably, selling the Deck. So, there is no real gambling danger. Those extra steps are what keeps it removed from being considered gambling legally. There, you happy?

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Actually I'm sad. I'm sad I'm having a conversation with someone who thinks they know more about the law than the New York Attorney general. I've lost, there's no argument I could make that could get through the Dunning-Kruger.

[–] greyscale@lemmy.grey.ooo 1 points 16 hours ago

there’s no argument I could make that could get through the Dunning-Kruger.

lol

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (22 children)

That is an appeal to authority. Every one is susceptible to a mistake. And I believe this one is. I think the court will rule in favor of Valve if they don't dismiss it. The way the economy works inside of Steam is what insulates it from being gambling. NY is arguing that being able to redeem your wallet for a Deck and then selling that deck, introduces the cash component of gambling. Not only that, but third party sellers are brought up and that adds several other layers that will be harder to make the case for. In addition, they claim Valve knowingly doesn't care about the third party sellers. That, in and of itself, is not Valve's problem specifically. If people want to pay money for a cosmetic item, it's no different than Pokémon. Again, an insulating layer. That is a far cry from an open and shut case, as you seem to think it to be.

Multiple lawyers would point out that introducing steps to acquire cash insulates it. Especially since one of those steps is selling an item. This economy that they are trying to build out is shaky at best. But that's just like, my opinion man. Do you have any of your own thoughts regarding the case? Have you read the case documents and come to a conclusion for yourself? Or are you just reading an article and calling it a day?

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

lmao im sure there is no money involved at all helping the ag care

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And how exactly does this supposed money change the legal arguments made in lawsuit?

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

because why should anyone care about the legal arguments or any ags actual knowledge about said laws if they only serve garbage companies like epic or ubi (and while pretending companies like draft kings dont exist) and that epic hasn’t attempted the same control that steam has, they just suck at the actual service part

and more to my point, this is really what the ny ag thinks is the best use of their time right now, lmao, not any kind of major fraud going on right now that maybe they want to look into if gambling is so very bad

epic games and its ‘coalition of state attorney generals’ is not self serving at all, epic just just really really cares about consumers!

if you can’t compete, litigate

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You're going to have to explain how Epic or Ubisoft benefit from shutting down Valve's gambling machine. If it's "Valve makes less money" then that's an irrelevant point because even if you shut down the gambling money Valve is still raking in cash. Valve simply goes from making an insane amount of money to making a slightly less insane amount of money. Valve losing gambling money is going to have zero impact on the PC storefront space. Valve losing the lawsuit in the article, now that could have an impact on the PC storefront space.

And you know, it's pretty sad that you instantly went to "she's corrupt" instead of even giving the smallest benefit of doubt to the possibility that she might be doing it because it's morally wrong. It's a sad because in your mind morality doesn't exist and corruption is everywhere.

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

if you can’t see how hurting valve is a direct benefit to epic or ubi we're wasting my time

irrelevant point? lol that’s not at all how business works

i don’t care about the gambling money beyond the hypocrisy of it while sports betting, digital currency markets and fucking polymarket exist, and i’m claiming shadiness because epic has its hand up multiple ags asses in multiple markets, just take a look at apple or google stores as well as valve, epic is funding this politic to its own benefit because it failed so fucking hard competing the real way and the ags see it as an easy target since coalitions cost money

if she actually gave a damn about gambling we’d be seeing her go after sports betting first by sheer volume, draft kings is fucking disgusting

steam is actually doing some positive things for consumers and it’s asinine to start with valve

if you think morality is involved in the american legal system you live a charmed life

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

if you can’t see how hurting valve is a direct benefit to epic or ubi we’re wasting my time

irrelevant point? lol that’s not at all how business works

Did you even read what I said? Valve losing it's gambling money is going to have no impact on their market share in the PC storefront market space because Valve is already making boatloads of money even without the gambling money. Valve doesn't need to do anything to make up for the loss because they don't need to be greedy. They can eat "the loss" and continue business as usual which means there is no direct benefit for any competing storefront. If anything it might end up being a net negative because (while it probably won't directly impact Epic or Ubisoft) some big studios still use lootboxes and this ruling would further push getting them banned. There's an indirect benefit to Epic of Ubisoft in the form of Valve making less money but when you make insane amounts of money making slightly less insane amounts of money isn't anything Epic of Ubisoft will feel. So yeah, I'd like to see you explain how the gambling lawsuit would directly benefit Epic of Ubisoft.

if she actually gave a damn about gambling we’d be seeing her go after sports betting first by sheer volume

So she shouldn't go after Valve where there's a legitimate case to be made? Because she should be going after some other nondescript entity that she may not even have a case against? Yeah, makes total sense.

if you think morality is involved in the american legal system you live a charmed life

So according to you SKG movement isn't driven by the moral point that we should own the things we buy? So who is funding that initiative? Who gains to benefit from it? Come on, give me the juice. Let me suckle on that conspiracy teat. It's all conspiracies, no good guys ever exists. Ross Scott is a paid actor.

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

lol you restating your position doesn't suddenly make it true

just because you have no idea how fortune 500s work isn't my concern

if she cares about valve while draft kings, polymarket, tcgs, roblox, and digital coins exist she’s a joke and this is from someone who thinks gambling is a cancer

roblox is literal gacha for preteens in a cesspool with pedos

and she doesn't have a case for valve either lol, this shits going nowhere, this whole ‘think of the kids bullshit’ for a game rated M and a site requiring you be > 13 is just more fud for a real id

it’s not conspiracy to literally google epic using states to sue competition: google apple valve have been targeted for anticompetitive practices

epic games anti trust + state coalitions all while epic has historically come under fire for also being anticompetitive pure lol

and for the gambling charges google all the states + federal governments (eu as well) pushing for online ids for various ‘think if the children’ reasons

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] architect@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Fucking Nintendo and that piece of shit Pokémon company! Fuck Magic the gathering, a bunch of groomers in the 90s trying to get kids addicted to gambling!

GUMBALL MACHINES AND THE GAMBLING OF FLAVOR!

All of those things were specificially degined to encourage addiction to buying the product, like yeah we should do something about those practices when they cross a line. Idk why you think it should all be fair game just because a less problematic version of the issue exists.

[–] warm@kbin.earth 1 points 3 weeks ago

What if governments just banned any form of real financial gambling in video games? Valve is still a business, they are going to try and make money, even if it's shitty. Also a parental problem if you are loading your childs Steam account with money 24/7 so they can gamble.