Had the same problem a few hours ago. It seems to be working now for me.
I would argue that you're dancing wrong if it doesn't scratch that itch to move to music. I don't understand how everyone else does it. I just don't feel it.
This is relatable. It's very useful for doing science, but the problem then is that you have all of these ideas in your head that are impossible to express succinctly because you need to invent new words, so it's very hard to sell the idea to anyone, and you end up working alone on everything and achieving very little.
I have no interest in this game, so I wouldn't know how it actually affects gameplay. But do you not agree that this is shitty business practice? You have a game. Sell the game. If you want microtransactions, then produce extra art or something and sell that. You can even make the case that separating out parts of the game into various DLCs on launch is acceptable. You're at least charging for something of value that you created.
Implementing anti-cheat costs resources and makes the end result strictly worse. Now you want people to pay you to undo that? That's creating negative value. We want the economy to run on people creating positive value.
I think a more apt comparison is if you're renting out a place where every light switch is three-way with one switch near the light it controls and another in a closet with all the other light switches. You can control the ones in the closet for free, but the ones in a reasonable location are pay-per-use. The problem isn't that the features aren't available for free. It's that they poured resources into deliberately making things worse, then they charge you to undo that. Literally creating negative value.
Responding to your first two paragraphs:
The enjoyability of a piece of art isn't independent of the creator. I will only speak for myself since I don't know other people's experiences. When you see something that tickles the happy part of your brain, part of that emotional response is in knowing that there's another person out there who probably felt that way and wanted to share those feeling with you. In experiencing those emotions, you also experience a connection with another human being. The knowledge that you're not alone and someone else out there has experienced the same thing. I wouldn't read through the credits because I don't care who that person is. I just care that this person existed. When you look at AI generated work and it just feels empty despite the surface beauty, this is the missing piece. It's the human connection.
The way I see it, mandatory voting is to ensure that everyone is capable of voting. It prevents problems like employers not giving people appropriate time off for voting. The trade off is of course that you'll have people voting more or less at random, or just going with whatever candidates their tribe is voting for without thinking. I suspect the latter averages out to a much smaller effect.
That's ridiculously tiny, especially considering that the game itself is likely around 100GB. They could probably watermark every single copy that ever goes out.
I can't say I know anything about how they choose their beta testers, but if I were to guess, there is probably some kind of vetting process that includes looking at how reputable you are. It would take a long time to build up that reputation.
"We don't have enough information" is a perfectly valid stance to take when you lack information.
If you disagree with the article, I'd like to see something a bit more substantiated than "it's bad".
Just stick your finger between your flaccid teeth and give them a good rub. No biggie.