I think DRM is frankly a lot more of a consumer education/rights thing than some kind of outright evil.

Buy a DVD for X, or "own" a DRM version for Y<X - why not. It's a bargain I'm happy to strike, or at least I appreciate the option.

The issue starts when:

- vendors don't make it clear that they can pull the rug

- or indeed can pull the rug for no reason. A bank can close my bank account, but not for no reason - and they can't hold on to my money just because. It should be the same with DRM-protected assets

- people don't understand the tradeoff they're making. It's like complaining about reckless overspending in credit cards leading to insane interest. Yes, it's partly to do with the product, equally credit cards totally have their use when used responsibly, and a healthy society has people understanding the differences.

My ps3 disc reader os broken and the only games i can play are digital games. At anyppint they can shut down the servers and the game that i boight wont be available anymore

If you can't hack it, you don't own it.

I don't like this sentiment. There's plenty of things you can hold but you don't really own. You're probably holding one right now!

Good examples, but this one didn't make sense to me:

>Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: The Game disappeared from Xbox and PlayStation stores in December 2014 when a license expired. Players campaigned for years before a remastered edition arrived in 2021.

I mean, physical stores can also stop selling a certain game. Existing sold games were unaffected. Why does this matter?

As they say, piracy is the only true ownership.

And if you can hold it, sometimes you still don’t own it.

Now let’s apply this to money and digital finance

The sad thing is that it's also true for money.

Cash that you can hold in your hand it's yours, whereas the cash that you own at the bank is a IOU subject to the contract that you sign .