this post was submitted on 19 May 2024

144 points (93.4% liked)

Games

16785 readers

826 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc..
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.

Comments.

No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works

144

[Gamers Nexus] ASUS Says We're "Confused" (www.youtube.com)

submitted 6 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Good to see Gamers Nexus videos talked about here on Lemmy!

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] Pieisawesome@lemmy.world 33 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You do know your license is meaningless?

[–] fiercekitten@lemm.ee 11 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Why does your comment have so many downvotes?

[–] ISOmorph@feddit.de 60 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My guess is that people disagree with propagating the delusion that pasting that link in every comment helps with stopping AI from feeding on your input.

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca -5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It must be the AI accounts that take offence with the licence.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (2 children)

IMO folks who feel like its a signature and don't want to recall the days of being on gamefaqs, usenet, and various web forums.

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 months ago

Ah yes the good ol' signature days, I could never find a slogan that I really connected with.

I see this signature mostly as a way of reminding people that everything they do will be put into a LLM.

Similar to the Ukrainian flag some people use in their username.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 6 months ago

I'm terrified for when they start adding animation to the anti ai signatures

[+] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -17 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

It must be the AI accounts that take offence with the licence.

That would be my guess.

There's a lot of history in the last three-ish weeks in multiple of my posts with me using the license, including a standalone topic, where people/""people"" are ripping into me every way they can for using it, so I'm assuming it's just more of that.

The same cycle tends to reoccur approximately every day to every other day. Usually someone asking an innocent question about it, and then somebody else replies to them, ripping into me, and then it explodes from there, derailing the OP.

I hate that the Lemmy admins are not taking care of the problem (if you admins are, and I'm just not just seeing it, then you have my apologies, and my thanks), but I'm also kind of numb to it at this point.

Getting to the topic of the OP...

Gamers Nexus is very consumer advocacy oriented, so I hate to think people are downvoting them for being them.

In fact, if you're looking to build a PC, and want good advice on your rights when it comes with warranty repair for products you may have purchased, I would definitely suggest watching the video that's linked In this topic (start @26:00 if you are in a hurry).

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Remember I'm pullin' for ya--we're all in this together. ✊🏼

[+] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Remember I’m pullin’ for ya–we’re all in this together. ✊🏼

Thanks, and no disrespect meant, but I would believe that more if you did license your own comments as well.

In case you need the formatting for it, here it is...

[~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode.en)

Feel free to replace the link to point to whatever license you wish to use for your own content, if you do not want to use the same one that I am using.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't think the license does anything at all, but it is weird to me that you are not also including some unique phrase or UUID. How are you going to prove their models used specifically your copyrighted content in the event that courts rule it is not fair use to do so? If you had a unique phrase you could probably trigger the model into repeating it as evidence.

[+] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I don’t think the license does anything at all

ProPublica would disagree with you.

you are not also including some unique phrase or UUID

The specific license number is explicitly stated.

How are you going to prove their models used specifically your copyrighted content in the event that courts rule it is not fair use to do so?

Already discussed in that other conversation post.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You are writing "anti-commercial AI," they are making their work explicitly available to republish non-commercially. You have completely different motivations. One major difference between you and ProPublica is they must have interacted with some actual lawyers explaining how copyright works.

[+] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You are writing “anti-commercial AI,” they are making their work explicitly available to republish non-commercially.

That's just a description of what the license actually does, non-commercial usage of my content.

It's actually not even my description, it's one I got from someone else, who's also licensing their content with the same license.

I have no problem with my content being used for non-commercial purposes.

You have completely different motivations.

No, I do not. My intent aligns with ProPublica.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Your license doesn't do what you say it does."

"Haha, joke's on you, I don't want it to do what I say it does."

Glad we figured that one out.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/watch?v=I3DwhTc7Z4o

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.