Sponsor: Get 10% off Squarespace purchases (https://geni.us/BqEpf)SUPPORT INDEPENDENT REPORTING: Grab one of our Limited Edition CyberSkeleton foil T-shirts,...
Well that link just leads to somebody mocking you then leads to another thread about how the license thing is totally bullshit lol
You’re being intellectually dishonest.
It points to a comment that has a link to a ProPublica article posted on Lemmy that also uses a Creative Commons license in the description for the post.
And if you instead go to the top comment of my linked comment (‘View all comments’ link), then you’ll see the whole long conversation that I refer to, where every point has already been discussed.
If your comments are going to gum up the thread with a segment thattheydon’t think will have any effect, what’s a few more to match?
Well their comments are their responsibility, not mine (you shouldn’t ‘blame the victim’), so I can’t talk towards their actions, except to say that each of us are supposed to behave civilly here on Lemmy, and not bully others to conform.
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.
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.
The link at the end of all his posts instantly brought me back to all the Facebook users who would add “FACEBOOK DOESN’T HAVE PERMISSION TO USE MY POST” to everything they shared.
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).
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.
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.
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.
My speculation would be: GamerNexxus plays the YouTube game and uses clickbaity titles (sometimes? I don’t know many of their videos). And it seems the host likes to hear himself talk (which would make sense, given that talking is his job).
However, some people don’t like it and therefore downvote comments that welcome the channel.
Good to see Gamers Nexus videos talked about here on Lemmy!
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
You do know your license is meaningless?
Best not to derail this topic. It’s been discussed to death already.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Well that link just leads to somebody mocking you then leads to another thread about how the license thing is totally bullshit lol
You’re being intellectually dishonest.
It points to a comment that has a link to a ProPublica article posted on Lemmy that also uses a Creative Commons license in the description for the post.
And if you instead go to the top comment of my linked comment (‘View all comments’ link), then you’ll see the whole long conversation that I refer to, where every point has already been discussed.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
This comment is explaining it very well: https://lemmy.ml/comment/10762134
I’ve explained myself quite well in that conversation.
And again, no need to repeat, it’s all there already. Unless you guys just enjoy repeating yourself again and again with zero effect.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Maybe folks just like symmetry.
If your comments are going to gum up the thread with a segment that they don’t think will have any effect, what’s a few more to match?
Well their comments are their responsibility, not mine (you shouldn’t ‘blame the victim’), so I can’t talk towards their actions, except to say that each of us are supposed to behave civilly here on Lemmy, and not bully others to conform.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
🙄
Why does your comment have so many downvotes?
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.
ProPublica disagrees with you.
But best not to derail this topic. It’s been discussed to death already.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Hahahahaha god damn what a load of bullshit. Did you also paste that image on Facebook?
The link at the end of all his posts instantly brought me back to all the Facebook users who would add “FACEBOOK DOESN’T HAVE PERMISSION TO USE MY POST” to everything they shared.
Best not to derail this topic. It’s been discussed to death already.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
You’re derailing this topic because it’s so hilariously stupid that it’s almost impossible to ignore.
It must be the AI accounts that take offence with the licence.
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.
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.
I’m terrified for when they start adding animation to the anti ai signatures
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)
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)
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.
ProPublica would disagree with you.
The specific license number is explicitly stated.
Already discussed in that other conversation post.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
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.
My speculation would be: GamerNexxus plays the YouTube game and uses clickbaity titles (sometimes? I don’t know many of their videos). And it seems the host likes to hear himself talk (which would make sense, given that talking is his job).
However, some people don’t like it and therefore downvote comments that welcome the channel.
/end of speculation
Or… you could… you know, watch the video yourself and be proven wrong.