Heratiki
Just another guy abandoning the old internet.
- 0 Posts
- 30 Comments
We had to walk a delicate line with our kids (2005-2017) when it came to interaction online. Never wanted them to feel like we were keeping them from experiencing the knowledge or social interaction the internet provided. But we also kept close tabs and paid special attention to specific behaviors. So if they were in their netbooks we’d make it a habit to walk behind them not to look but just to see what their reaction would be. Kids mostly know right from wrong and when they feel it “might” be wrong they try and hide it from their parents. If you pay attention you’ll see them “hiding” and that’s a sign to dig deeper. This way they maintain their privacy and any issues can be brought to light with them directly.
(Understand that the following will have specific details changed just for anonymity’s sake) Grooveshark was the first interaction we saw was troublesome. So we sat our daughter down and asked her direct why she was trying to hide her netbook from us seeing it and what had she been doing she felt she needed to hide? The alternative was to relinquish the netbook until she told us. Come to find out a friend of hers from school (female 2 years older) was trying to slowly convince her to lie to her parents and sneak off with her. Our daughter told us this because it scared her not because she would lose her access. We also stayed open and active with our kids indulging in the same things they were interested in (Minecraft, Guitar Hero, etc) regardless if it was explicitly something we enjoyed. So she didn’t lose access to Grooveshark because she really loved listening to music. We just kept an eye on it and she removed her friend from communication. We explained what she was likely attempting and her friend admitted to it. They’re not friends now but it never happened again.
Don’t get me wrong, we made tons of bad calls before we learned what worked. But the key to all of it is paying attention. Not hovering over them and stopping them from making mistakes. But watching the nuance of their interactions with everyone around them. If they start to get secretive then there is usually a reason. And it’s best to just talk to them about it. And if one conversation doesn’t do it then have multiple conversations. Listen to what they have to say and why they were being secretive. Works best when they’re not expecting it too (like in the middle of playing Minecraft together). Anyway that’s just IMHO.
According to this Tom’s Hardware article (https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/mini-pc-maker-ships-systems-with-factory-installed-spyware-acemagic-says-issue-was-contained-to-the-first-shipment) it isn’t firmware based spyware but just existing on the machine drive.
They were also found on the restore partition so a full wipe and fresh install would eliminate the issue. AceMagic have also claimed that the issue was isolated to the first round of shipments.
It’s very much a gimmick. I’m 45 yrs old and was able to mess around with it at a friend’s house. It takes a lot of getting used to for it to become useful and accurate in games and will make any other game you play become a struggle. So if you ONLY play Warzone and don’t do anything else with your computer then sure go for it. You’ll need to “reprogram” your brain to use this mouse for the games you currently play and it’s really only a fun gimmick for shooting games.
IMHO: It’s just more plastic garbage and while a fun gimmick it would last about a month before becoming something you stuff in a drawer and likely never use again.
I mean you’re playing the game, aren’t you simply paying in an unconventional way? You can’t pretend to think that you playing a game you paid nothing for is bad for trying to extract something in return?
That being said, games where you pay for the game and still have a ton of microtransactions to actually enjoy most of the content of the game are just highway robbery.
Yeah the most egregious problems with a lot of these microtransaction games are because of parents who just don’t parent at all. I work with a guy who his kid calls him constantly while he’s at work so he can get more robux. And he just gives in no questions asked. If my kids would have done something like that I would have just taken their game away. Even when my children were growing up and they wanted to buy games or spend money on their phones there were ways you could track it and pay attention to it. Lots of parents just don’t care, and that’s probably the most sad aspect of it all.
Dad/Mom shouldn’t be an open bank account and respect should be the currency exchange. My kids had to do chores for the things they wanted to do and they had limitations to what that could go to. Because they don’t need to vegetate on the couch for the entire summer playing a game on their console only to get in trouble and lose it and continue playing on their cell phone. It blows my mind how many kids just basically parent themselves. And i was a latchkey kid! I was parented by respect and love for my parents and the fear of what could happen if I did stupid things. Not fear of punishment but fear of consequences in general. I accidentally shot out a neighbors window with my friends BB gun when my parents were at work. Parents found out and I worked mowing lawns and etc to get up enough money to replace it. Because I broke it, it was my responsibility to fix it. Too often kids don’t have consequences.
Man what a dumb rant. Sorry about that. Sore subject I guess.
Sadly customization and individualization are a huge content driver for most of these games. And regardless of them being “free2play” it all costs money to produce.
Most of your pay 2 play games don’t offer this huge amount of revolving customization. Even when they do offer a large amount of customization it sees an influx of individuality until the majority of the system has been attempted and then it just disappears.
Live service games end up costing loads to maintain simply in server costs so to keep up with a massive player base I can’t imagine the monthly cost that goes along with it. And that’s not even including extra content for the game itself. Itsuwari No Alice opened up about maintenance costs back in August in a bid to stay alive. It’s been eye opening when you consider the niche size of Itsuwari no Alice. https://automaton-media.com/en/news/20230803-20472/
Oh I’m old and have been playing most FPS games on consoles for nearly 20 years. I’m terrible on PC but want to get better and seriously think it has to do with my death grip on my mouse. I still can’t use Keyboard as I’ve got bad carpal tunnel in my left hand and it’s near infinite pain after 10 minutes. So I use a mouse and a PlayStation Navi controller for WASD.
Being that both IP’s are ongoing I’m hoping that going forward they’ll at least increase access to the game. I’m not expecting them to revive it to previous status.
I’m just hoping with Kotick out things will stop getting worse and a lot of the IP’s end up on GamePass.
And as far as first party stuff goes Flight Sim, Forza Horizon 5, Halo Infinite all have been fairly well received and are at the very least console exclusives. Minecraft isn’t going the way that a lot of the Java players like but it’s much more accessible and on damn near every device known to man. And that IP is still selling gangbusters even with Legends and Dungeons being not fantastic.
While GPT was trained on the material it does not produce plagiarizing results. It can have reused phrases but only because those phrases are reused across multiple examples and not from a specific work. It learns like b comes after a, c comes after b, d comes after c and then will sometimes reproduce ABCD because it’s normal for that to be used within the context. It is not plagiarism but more akin to the human capability of guiltless probability. If it’s plagiarizing then it’s doing so by coincidence due to context.
So a company that makes lock picking tools is liable for when a burglar uses them to steal? Or a car manufacturer is liable when some uses their car to kill? How about knives, guns, tools, chemicals, restraints, belts, rope, and I could go on and nearly use every single word in the English language yet none of those manufacturers can be sued for someone misusing their products. They’d have to show intent of maliciousness which I just don’t see is possible in the context they’re seeking.
It’s easy. They’re grasping at straws because their career isn’t what it used to be. It’s something new and viral so it must be an easy target to exploit for money. Personally I’d be on top of it and setting up contracts to allow AI to use my likeness for a small subset of the usual pay. I just can’t imagine not taking advantage of the ability to do absolutely nothing and still get paid for it. Instead they appear to actively be trying to tear it down. If they were wanting to set guidelines then they would be rallying congress not suing a company based on how you FEEL it should be.
Yes. Imagine how much trouble ANY actor would be in if they were sued for impersonating someone nearly identical but not that person. If Sarah Silverman ever interacted with a person and then imitated that person on stage for her own personal benefit without the other persons express consent it would be no different. And comedians pick up their comedy from everything around them both natural and imitation.
That’s not what this is. To use your example it would be like taking her book and rearranging ALL of the words to make another book and selling that book. But they’re not selling the book or its contents, they’re selling how their software interprets the book for the benefit of the user. This would be like suing teachers for teaching about their book.
I’ve glanced at these a few times now and there are a lot of if ands and buts in there.
I’m not understanding how an AI itself infringes on the copyright as it has to be directed in its creation at this point (GPT specifically). How is that any different than me using a program that will find a specific piece of text and copy it for use in my own document. In that case the document would be presented by me and thus I would be infringing not the software. AI (for the time being) are simply software and incapable of infringement. And suing a company who makes the AI simply because they used data to train its software is not infringement as the works are not copied verbatim from their original source unless specifically requested by the user. That would put the infringement on the user.
I’m thinking the code is obfuscated by random calls to various functions so that the code block isn’t just one section you can easily see but sprinkled throughout instead.