- 0 Posts
- 36 Comments
Notability guideline is here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline
How about you just watch and make the call yourself? Nothing about the video made me think she’s a neo nazi nor did I think she’s a bigot. People are allowed to want and like different things. Just because they have different wants doesn’t mean they should just get random negative label on them and then be hated without actually even seeing what they say.
Here’s the origin article from torrentfreak. https://torrentfreak.com/modded-hardware-defendant-denies-nintendos-copyright-claims-in-court-241006/
Shitty IGN is just re-reporting based on torrent freak with less info.
Which version is that? The original Skyrim (aka oldrim) isn’t even purchasable on steam and hidden unless you bought it back then. But some people still play that because some old mods only support oldrim.
Special edition is the main one now. It’s holding 30k very steadily since 2020 https://steamdb.info/app/489830/charts/#breakdown
Many of modders also moved to gog version, myself included. Because I can permanently version control on gog unlike stream.
Most people don’t actually understand how copyright works. And the actual right that’s restricted is quite ridiculous but it is how it is…
Copyright is not a right given to the copyright holder, unlike every other right in law. Copyright is a exclusion placed on every other human being on earth from reproducing what you did (except few countries that didn’t sign it but practically no one lives there or is a territory that effectively works under another sovereignty which does). This distinction is very important. That is, everytime something is created, every other human now has less freedom since they could do that thing before but no longer can. So if I create an original bunny like character, that is copyrighted to me. But I could always depict that and so could you–had you thought of it. But now you no longer can.
This means that virtually every thing made in relation to that original copyright becomes illegal unless you get permission from the copyright holder. There are exceptions such as transformative, parody, fair use, etc but I’ll not get into that for now.
In other words specific to this case, every game footage on earth is illegal. But they only continue to exist by the grace of the companies not telling them to take it down. Some companies actually write into their EULA/terms that fan content, etc may be allowed, but again, those are the exceptions. The rule of law is that everything is illegal to start. And that only the copyright holder and its agents be able to request a punishment for breaking the law.
It’s a system where it makes every normal human beings into a law breaking entity first and by doing so, it allows the copyright holder to punish anyone they see fit.
This is not a frivolous DMCA. And even if it was, there has been no case where that was ever punished. Even outright perjury for DMCA–which I’ve dealt with thousands of times doesn’t actually get punished in practise.
Mehaffey also argues Shift Up and Sony’s Stellar Blade trademark (filed in January 2023) is “confusingly similar” to his own Stellarblade trademark (filed in June 2023), citing similar colour schemes and a stylised ‘S’.
Wait… What? They filed for trademark AFTER Sony and now demanding this? That makes no sense. It sounds like Sony should sue them for trademark infringement instead.
I would assume that they are saying in a bigger scope and just happen to divide down to a ratio of 1 to 32.
Like rendering in 480p (307k pixels) and then generating 4k (8.3M pixels). Which results in like 1:27, sorta close enough to what he’s saying. The AI upscale like dlss and fsr are doing just that at less extreme upscale.
Your lifetime is nearly 80 years. Companies lasting 80 years is ultra rare in history, large behemoths included. I bet you can already name several behemoth IT companies that’s already come and gone.
I wouldn’t trust even larger behemoths like google and MSFT to last another 80 yrs. It’s just too statistically unlikely.
I don’t know if steam does this since I have no experience selling on steam, but generally when you sell anything anywhere the sales channels will often demand that you give them the lowest retail price. Most commonly done by ones that give the most exposure since they have that much more power. Failure to do so will result in some penalty (Amazon prevents your offer from being in buy box) or just outright refusal to take your product (such as Walmart).
Additionally, customers complain too when you sell at two different pricing elsewhere. If you’re a company that gives virtually no support (like you sell pickles or whatever), you prob don’t care. But for things like games, you’ll get bombarded with demands that they got ripped off by buying from one place and ask for difference in pricing or submit a refund request. Refunds are more expensive to sellers than not selling at all since you still have to pay transaction/refund fees by payment processors. Or if physical product, cost of shipping as well.
Different sales channels having different pricing isn’t really an option. It’s not really worth it. You’ll get problems left and right.
I get your point… But I feel like people in this thread doesn’t know how cake making works…
20 people will make a single cake faster. Not 20x faster, but faster. There are multiple part of the work that can be divided out to different people. Like you can have one person make batter while other makes icing. Fancy cakes actually do take multiple people to make simultaneously.
There are many different niches of ML. 99% of hobbyist would use consumer grade hardware. It’s quite frankly more than good enough.
Even in commercial usage, consumer GPUs provide better value unless you need to do something that very specifically require a huge vram pool. Like connecting multiple A100 GPUs to have hundreds or tens of thousands of gigabyte vram. Those use cases only come up if you’re making base models for general purpose.
If you’re using it for single person use case, something like 4090 is actually the best hardware. Enough ram to run almost anything and it’s higher clock speed than enterprise GPU means your results come back faster.
Even training doesn’t require that much vram. Chat models are generally more vram heavy but if you’re doing specific image training like stable diffusion for how to render your face, or some specific fetish porn, you only really need like 12GB of vram to do it. There are ways to even do it at lower like 8GB but 12 is sweet value spot where even 3060 or 4060ti can do. Consumer GPUs will get that trained in like 30min to 24hrs depending on settings and model.
Easier to show than to explain.
I’m all for unions. But I’m not sure how it translates to good for players. Unions exist for fair wages and working environment, not direction of how games should be made.
Edit: People sure seem to get the wrong impression with my question. As I said in the very first line, I am for unions. They’re great and we should strive for fair working wages and hours, especially in 2023 where wages are stagnating while having massive inflation. We should have happy employees and I prefer my games made by happy employees. Failure to keep the wages up is creating shit ton of societal problems.
Issue is the delusion people are presenting here. Unions are not magic. It doesn’t automatically improve unrelated things. What people are missing is that there is no evidence the union has ever advocated for a better product. If one exists, despite my desperate attempt to find one, then it’s clearly a fringe case. All the replies are making a huge logical leap of simply saying happy worker produces better product with no reasoning behind it. Unions never argue for better product. That’s just not what unions do. It argues for the betterment of workers.
Unionizing increases productivity for some sectors. But they’re usually rare and only seen in specific industries. They generally have no significant impact on productivity based on research. If it straight up increased productivity and made better products, every company would love it. The argument is counter-logical. Companies do what is efficient. Even if we assumed individual productivity is increased, there’s still no evidence that these individuals would have the capacity to change the direction in which the product is being made in the upper tier.
We need unions. But unions aren’t magic.
Almost every tech company functions in this manner today.
Modern tech cycle is basically keep operating at a loss to increase userbase. And then one of the 3 scenarios happen. 1. Most obvious, they run out of investor money and make drastic unpopular changes to make profit as seen here. 2. Sell company to an even bigger tech company, who will then most likely kill it too. 3. Become google/meta/etc. themselves, which is the least likely scenario.
Sorry, this is wrong.
As a general statement: No, I am not. You’re making an over specific scenario to make it true. Sure, if I take 1 image and train a model just on that one image, it’ll make that exact same image. But that’s no different than me just pressing copy and paste on a single image file. The latter does the job whole lot better too. This entire counter argument is nothing more than being pedantic.
Furthermore, if I’m making such specific instructions to the AI, then I am the one who’s replicating the art. It doesn’t matter if I use a pencil to trace out the existing art, using photoshop, or creating a specific AI model. I am the one who’s doing that.
What gives a human right to learn off of another person without credit? There is no such inherent right.
Even if such a right existed, I as a person who can make AI training, would then have the right to create a tool to assist me in learning, because I’m a person with same rights as anyone else. If it’s just a tool, which it is, then it is not the AI which has the right to learn, I have the right to learn, which I used to make the tool.
I can use photoshop to replicate art a lot more easily than with AI. None of us are going around saying Photoshop is wrong. (Though we did say that before) The AI won’t know any specific art unless it’s an extremely repeated pattern like “mona lisa”. It literally do not have the capacity to contain other people’s art, and therefore it cannot replicate others art. I have already proven that mathematically.
If AI art is stolen data, then every artists on earth are thieves too.
Do you think artists just spontaneously conjure up art? No. Through their entire life of looking at other people’s works, they learned how to do stuff, they emulate and they improve. That’s how human artists come to be. Do you think artists go around asking permission from millions of past artists if they can learn from their art? Do artists track down whoever made the fediverse logo if I want to make a similar shaped art with it? Hell no. Consent in general is impossible too because whole lot of them are likely too dead to give consent be honest. Its the exact same way AI is made.
Your argument holds no consistent logic.
Furthermore, you likely have a misunderstanding of how AI is trained and works. AI models do not store nor copy art that it’s trained on. It studies shapes, concepts, styles, etc. It puts these concepts into matrix of vectors. Billions of images and words are turned into mere 2 gigabytes in something like SD fp16. 2GB is virtually nothing. There’s no compression capable of anywhere near that. So unless you actually took very few images and made a 2GB model, it has no capability to store or copy another person’s art. It has no knowledge of any existing copyrighted work anymore. It only knows the concepts and these concepts like a circle, square, etc. are not copyrightable.
If you think I’m just being pro-AI for the sake of it. Well, it doesn’t matter. Because copyright offices all over the world have started releasing their views on AI art. And it’s unanimously in agreement that it’s not stolen. Furthermore, resulting AI artworks can be copyrighted (lot more complexity there, but that’s for another day).
BG3, yes. Massive success.
Veilguard is a massive flop. It sold a lot compared to other games, sure, but based on the amount of money they spent and time in development, that was a shit investment. They were expecting like 10m sales, doing 1.5 instead according to whistleblowers.