I am not sure I fully grasp what’s at stake here. Does it mean that:
* Only 1 person at a time can borrow play a retro game physically (in a dedicated library) even if there are more than 1 copies available
* Libraries cannot offer remote access to their retro games (I wonder, can libraries offer that for books? In know my university library had a digital library but that’s it) even if safeguarded
I don’t really understand the actual consequences of this new ruling, the article doesn’t really explain that in my opinion.
What I saw in a YT video related to piracy [0] was that game companies remove their DRM after the game has been effectively pirated, since it doesn't really matter anymore, and cost them money + worse experience for paying end-users.
The guy in the video makes the point that: Game is released --> paying users suffer the lower perf caused by DRM while pirates crack it --> pirates succeed, company removes DRM, paying users benefit from improved perf ^^
Hofstadter talks about such paradoxes in his book -- from what I remember, the paradox stems from self-reference (he also uses the example of "adjectives that describe themselves", aka the Grelling–Nelson paradox)
Funny how things are perceived differently between inside France and outside France.
In France, La Sorbonne isn't considered particularly prestigious. Grandes Ecoles (ENS for research across various topics but especially science; Polytechnique for engineering; HEC for business; ENA/Science Po for politics) are considered much more prestigious and elite (getting there is harder than for La Sorbonne, you have to undergo 2 years of prep schools and then take an exam, where only the top scorers get into these Ecoles), and will get you the higher paying jobs.
Outside France, seems that these Grandes Ecoles don't hold much prestige against La Sorbonne which seems to be considered more elite.