this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)

PCGaming

6615 readers
11 users here now

Rule 0: Be civil

Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy

Rule #2: No advertisements

Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments

Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions

Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.

Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.

Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts

Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments

Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Finally! My chance to be top 100 in the world at something!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (5 children)

There is a SW Battlefront that is a month old?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Thats pretty brutal.

~~Does anyone know why this is?~~

Edit: never mind. From the article...

has been met with poor reviews due to its price and performance. As a result, the FPS game’s player count is dwindling quickly, now dipping below 100 Steam users.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It was a horrid mess of a lazy release, also stole content from modders.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

also stole content from modders.

That's not cool at all.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

What is this link in your posts? I'm reading the site but I don't understand what it is really.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (5 children)

The equivalent of this but for nerds and it's just as effective

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What is this link in your posts? I’m reading the site but I don’t understand what it is really.

I'm licensing my comments with a Creative Commons license, so that if anyone wants to use them to train their AI models/bots with, they have to at the very least give citation to that.

I'm hoping it's a way of deterring bot activity on my comments. It's something that I saw someone else doing, so I decided to emulate it, since it's just a simple copy and paste, and if it works, it's worth the momentary paste.

Plus it's really interesting that its gotten a lot of positive and negative feedback. Some people really get bent out of shape seeing it being there, and others just have a natural curiosity about it. So it's kind of interesting to see that as well, just by using it.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How are you going to prove your data was used?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How are you going to prove your data was used?

Honestly, I wasn't going to worry about that, I'm just doing a quick copy and paste, and moving on. If it works, it works.

I'm making the assumption that any AI model building developer who sees the license notation would honor the the Creative Commons license.

Otherwise I will just wait for years from now when Congress creates new disclosure legislation. Companies are already starting to get pissed off at each other about who's paying who, and who's using what content to program their AI models with, and they find out who those other people are that is using their content. I'm pretty sure lobbying efforts are on going right now, and legislation will come out soon enough.

After that legislation exists, I can go back to all my comments and sue the companies, once those AI model building companies have to disclose their data source. I'm retired, I have time on my hands.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're just like boomers on Facebook copy pasting a comment on their way to say that Meta can't monetize their data.

If AI is trained on Lemmy content it will just scrub the site, convert it to raw text, chew the data and use it to spit out answers to stupid questions, your link will change fuck dick to that and even you are admitting that you don't intend to do anything about it.

The only way to make sure AI isn't trained on what you're writing is to have a journal that you share with no one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You’re just like boomers on Facebook copy pasting a comment on their way to say that Meta can’t monetize their data.

I was waiting for this one, and was surprised I hadn't seen it so far in this latest conversation; it took a while for it to show up.

I mean if attaching a Creative Commons license to your content is being a boomer, then yeah someone get me a walker to use, proudly.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (9 children)

Yeah, I don't think you understood what I meant by that but carry on.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It’s a stupid trend where people think they are somehow liberating their comments from being used in training by AI.

Spoiler alert, it doesn’t work. And even if it did, no one actually cares about your comment about (checks thread) people NOT playing a video game.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

So strange how some people get really bent out of shape seeing it.

If someone is going to use my content to build their AI model and train their bots, then I want compensation for it.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It might seem silly to most but all it takes for something to become real is for the public to demand it. And if those in power won't help, oust them.

At least this person demands something novel and positive for the user. What is fiction today can become reality tomorrow.

Seems harmless at worst and positive at best.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Love your username! Is that a Deep Space Nine reference?

Edit: I've been ghosted by Rom. 😋

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I mean the appropriate way to do that is to flag the site data as not approved for AI training, as shown here: https://www.pcmag.com/news/dont-want-google-to-use-your-website-for-ai-training-you-can-now-opt-out

It’s pretty much just a flag in the robots.txt and it has a whole lot more weight than linking CC in your post.

So if you want to actually make a difference, lobby your Lemmy instance to add this flag.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I mean the appropriate way to do that

Is there some Lemmy rule somewhere that I don't know about that says I can't attach a Creative Commons license to my comments?

It’s pretty much just a flag in the robots.txt

Because everyone knows that's always honored and obeyed, right?

So if you want to actually make a difference, lobby your Lemmy instance to add this flag.

Or do both.

Because users are the final owners of their own content, their own comments. Not Lemmy, not anyone else. They have the first responsibility of protecting their rights.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oof yeah that was not the correct word at all. It would have been better to say effective.

You’re always free to do what you want of course!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

You’re always free to do what you want of course!

You sure about that? 😇

The vibe I'm getting from you is kind of the opposite, as you're the third person to give me a major hassle about them just within the 24-hour period.

I honestly wasn't expecting the level of Spanish Inquisition that I've gotten over using them, it's really fascinating actually. /queueMontyPython

Anyway, I would love to stop talking about this and derailing what the thread was actually supposed to be about.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

Oh neat I didn't know about that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I just think it’s silly that people think it actually works.

Besides, if AI really is powerful enough to make a splash in the world, wouldn’t you WANT it to contain your data? That would make it more favorable to your viewpoints.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I only want my data to be used to be used to generate dialog for gay furry porn.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I only want my data to be used to be used to generate dialog for gay furry porn.

Rom would be very disappointed with you.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Idk, sounds like some new holosuite programs that can earn him and I some latinum. I'm the idea person, he's the engineer. Big picture thinking!

We'll get our own moon soon enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I just think it’s silly that people think it actually works.

Are you a lawyer? Are you familiar with the Creative Commons license?

If not, please feel free to get back to us after you get your degree, and let us all know what the final word is on this.

Besides, if AI really is powerful enough to make a splash in the world, wouldn’t you WANT it to contain your data?

Oh I would love that, if they paid me to use my content, under terms that I would agree for it to be used (betterment of Humankind, etc.).

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m quite familiar. It legally works, if you can prove that your data actually made it into the training set, you might be able to successfully sue them. That’s extremely unlikely though. If you can’t litigate a law, then it essentially doesn’t exist.

Besides, a researcher scraping websites isn’t going to take the time to filter out random pieces of data based on a link contained in the body. If you can show me a research paper or blog post or something where a process is described to sanitize the input data based on license, that would be pretty damn interesting. Maybe it’ll exist in the future?

Besides, the best way to opt-out of AI training is to enable site-wide flags, which mark the content therein as off limits. That would have the benefit of not only protecting you, but everyone else on the site. Lobbying your lemmy instance to enable that will get a lot more mileage than anything else you could do, because it’s an industry sanctioned way to accomplish what you want.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I’m quite familiar. It legally works, if you can prove that your data actually made it into the training set, you might be able to successfully sue them. That’s extremely unlikely though. If you can’t litigate a law, then it essentially doesn’t exist.

And what makes you think that can't be done? You make it sound like because (you believe) it's so hard to do you should have just not even bother trying, that seems really defeatist.

And like I said multiple times now, it's a simple quick copy and paste, a 'low-hanging fruit' way of licensing/protecting a comment. If it works, great it works.

Besides, the best way to opt-out of AI training is to enable site-wide flags, which mark the content therein as off limits.

I have no control over the Lemmy servers, I only have control over my own comments that I post.

Also, the two options are not mutually exclusive.

because it’s an industry sanctioned way to accomplish what you want.

Again, both you and I know the history of the robots.txt file and how often and how well it's honored, especially these days with the new frontier of AI modeling.

It would be best to do both, just to make sure you have coverage, so that if the robots.txt is not honored, at least the comment itself is still licensed.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (12 children)

Well that’s dumb

Why?

What's wrong with attaching a Creative Commons license to your comments?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Brought to you by Carl's Jr

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Brought to you by Carl’s Jr

Just watch that movie again the other night. Good stuff.

Well that’s dumb

Why?

What’s wrong with attaching a Creative Commons license to your comments?

Come on, don't be afraid, answer the question. 😇

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (9 children)

Lol, it just reminded me of that. I don't care either way, good for you for standing up for shit. I just think anything I say will never have any impact on shit one way or the other. To me it's like having a conversation on the street and then saying, don't repeat what I said it's trademarked, or something. If you're posting art or actual creative content then fine, you have all reason to say so, but a comment on a discussion online... I'm not trying to copyright my shit takes on everyday speech. If you think for one second anyone cares or will care what we talk about here and now then go ahead, it doesn't affect me one way or another, but I don't see the need. That link will not stop anyone for using your words from bot training or whatever.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

I didn't even know this was out, so lack of marketing may be an issue as well.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›