9bananas
@9bananas@feddit.org
- Comment on My petty gripe: forced software updates just make everything worse 6 days ago:
Windows itself already splits those up in security and feature updates…
- Comment on It's on your blood! 1 week ago:
no it’s more like saying “desalinated water is fine, it’s the brine that’s problematic.”
which is true.
and the same goes for teflon:
the PFAS are toxic, not teflon itself.
glossing over that distinction is disingenuous…
yes, you can’t make one without the other, true, but the end product is not toxic. that’s an important difference you can’t just ignore in order to say teflon is toxic, because a requisite material in (cheap) production is toxic.
because that’s like saying desalinated water is toxic, just because brine is toxic…which is obviously ridiculous.
- Comment on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down, but Valve says payment processors 'specifically cited' a Mastercard rule about damaging the brand 3 weeks ago:
check your email addresses, then check for malware on your system.
that’s definitely not normal…
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
what a ridiculous idea. that’s not how anything works:
copyright applies to the intellectual property, not the exact file.
so the code itself is the copyrighted thing, not the file you download.
it doesn’t matter whether you download the gpl version, you type out the gpl version by hand, or delete all new code until only gpl code is left.
all you would need to proof is that the code is identical to the gpl code. how you got to that code is completely irrelevant.
you have some fundamental misunderstandings about copyrighted material, intellectual property, and fair use.
most importantly: copyright applies to intellectual property. the idea of a thing, not the physical thing.
so in the case of this emulator, the file and where you got it from is completely irrelevant; only the content of the file, the code, has any meaning. which means any files that contain the same code are identical in the eyes of the law, regardless of how you got them.
copyright is not a contract, but a license. and a license is a manual that explains how intellectual property (the idea of a thing, not the physical thing) is allowed to be used by someone. it’s not specific to an individual, which is why contracts have to be signed by both parties. so no, you don’t have a contract and no obligation to adhere to the new one at all. you can choose to use the old license, as long as you don’t use any of the new code.
unless you want to modify and/or distribute the new code, the license (CC-BY-NC-ND) is irrelevant for the user.
and you can modify your own private copy as much as you want, you just can’t distribute it, or modify and use it in a way that is illegal in some other way. but that’s about it.
and all of this applies to both US and german law.
and none of this is remotely relevant, because the gpl version is still available for download!
nothing got replaced, so the gpl license is very much still applicable to that version of the software!
“new” does not mean that the old version went anywhere; it’s still around. and you can still use, modify, and distribute it under the gpl.
- Comment on Tea app leak worsens with second database exposing user chats 3 weeks ago:
for “this dude” to have any meaning to anyone, there needs to be a name attached at the very least.
that alone is personal information.
personal information is any information that can be used to uniquely identify a natural person.
this app was nothing but personal information being deliberately spread without the persons consent.
man am i glad this sort of bullshit isn’t even up for discussion in the EU…what an absolute nightmare for privacy…
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
yes, correct, assuming a solo project!
thank you for the correction.
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
yes and no:
the copyright owner can do whatever they want, but they can’t really revoke a GPL license. that’s not really a thing.
and the part about
If you obtained your copy under the old license you can use it under the old license when you obtain a new copy you have a new license agreement.
seems to me like you are implying that “use under the old license” means “run the program on my own machine”, but that’s not true, since GPL explicitly allows redistribution and modification.
under a GPL license, you effectively give up control over your software voluntarily:
The GNU General Public Licenses are a series of widely used free software licenses, or copyleft licenses, that guarantee end users the freedom to run, study, share, or modify the software.
(highlighted the relevant portion for your convenience)
this makes revoking the license effectively impossible.
you could continue development under a different license, but that gets legally tricky very quickly.
for example: all the code previously under GPL, stays under GPL. so if someone where to modify those parts of the code and redistribute it as a patch, you couldn’t legally do anything about that.
which seems to be what the OOP claims the change to a CC-BY-NC-ND forbids, apparently misunderstanding, that this new license only applies to code added to the repo since the license change, not the code from before the license change.
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
yes you can!
…for new versions. not for already released ones.
at least not with most common copyleft/open source licenses.
- Comment on Women’s ‘red flag’ app Tea is a privacy nightmare 4 weeks ago:
i mean…an app directly copying a black mirror episode (but almost exclusively targeting a specific demographic) does ring some very, VERY loud alarm bells…
like, this is literally the plot of nosedive.
it’s a social credit system.
and none of the people even know they HAVE a score, so it’s somehow even worse than the fictional scenario.
this will, absolutely, hurt innocents and it will do so by design.
“fuck them innocents!”…just because they happen to be men?
how is that anything other than misandrist?
how is that defensible?
how is doxxing, mass libel, and targeted harassment a solution to sexism and rape culture?
I’d be really interested in hearing anything about how this is supposed to help women, because i struggle to see how sowing massive, unearned distrust between men and women is going to make anyone any safer…
I’m really, REALLY glad that the GDPR would nuke this sort of nonsense from orbit…uploading pictures of strangers, for the explicit purpose of gossiping about them behind their backs, spreading awful rumors?
what. the. actual. fuck. is wrong with you people?
and i don’t mean women, or men, i mean americans and their total disregard for privacy and digital safety. what the hell…
- Comment on First they came for steam, then they came for itch.io . 4 weeks ago:
hey, no worries!
just felt like it might be useful to know where the misunderstanding happened
i’m glad if it helped, cheers!
- Comment on First they came for steam, then they came for itch.io . 4 weeks ago:
ah, that makes more sense!
just as an aside, for future reference:
you wrote,
Bitcoin, and the millions other way more efficient alternatives 😜"
when you really meant to write:
Bitcoin, or the millions other way more efficient alternatives 😜"
it may be s subtle difference, but when you write “and” it means bitcoin AND the other alternatives are efficient.
when you use “or” instead, it means bitcoin OR the more efficient alternatives.
so my interpretation was correct. you just didn’t write what you thought you did…
- Comment on At this point who in the world could stop Trump over doing something totally illegal? Like lets say using bunker buster bombs to destroy DEM cities? Or is USA communially FUCKED? 4 weeks ago:
i know it’s not the point of the thread, but FYI:
bunker busters can’t destroy cities. not practically, anyways.
they’re hyper-specialized munitions that get dropped from high up in order to pick up a lot of gravitational momentum to then penetrate deep underground and through multiple layers of concrete.
they’re long, extremely resilient, stupidly heavy rods with relatively small warheads.
they’re the "rods from god"s little cousins, essentially.
although there’s some speculation that some kinds of modern concrete might be strong enough to withstand even multiple direct hits…
the kind of munitions that could cause enough destruction to level a city are M.O.A.B.s, for conventional arms, or straight-up nuclear bombs.
…or you could use a LOT of smaller bombs, like the russians in ukraine, or the israelis in gaza.
but bunker busters, while having an objectively badass name, are not actually that scary a weapon, unless you’re sitting in an actual bunker; they’re more of a precision weapon!
- Comment on Women are anonymously spilling tea about men in their cities on viral app 4 weeks ago:
says right at the end: this is from 1992
- Comment on Isn't there somebody you forgot to ask? 4 weeks ago:
if you’re going to be all “uhm, aktchually” you might want to make sure you get the terms right:
when it’s 2 companies, it’s called a duopoly.
- Comment on First they came for steam, then they came for itch.io . 4 weeks ago:
“Bitcoin” and “efficient” do not fit together like that…
- Comment on Does anyone else find it suspicious that there wasn't any criticism on here about Stop Killing Games until after it hit 1.4M signatures? 4 weeks ago:
yes, that’s pretty much correct.
and i think i misunderstood the part about the obligations only kicking in after service ends; you are right about that.
yeah, there’s a lot of wiggle room; the proposal is pretty generous!
- Comment on Does anyone else find it suspicious that there wasn't any criticism on here about Stop Killing Games until after it hit 1.4M signatures? 4 weeks ago:
The obligations only kick in once the game gets shut down
I’m afraid that’s a misconception: in most cases the obligations have to be considered during development.
in 95%+ of cases, you can’t “just release the binaries”, because the developers usually don’t own all of their assets/code.
modern coding, and especially game dev, is highly modularized.
you usually don’t build code from the ground up, if there is an existing solution for what you need. (some indie game devs still do that, but it’s usually because there isn’t an existing solution, or not enough budget; it’s not the usual approach)
so for example, you wouldn’t create your own networking solution for a multiplayer game, you’d just use an existing solution.
but because you didn’t write that solution yourself, that part of the code either needs to fall under a license that allows for redistribution, or it has to be removed before you “release the binaries”.
and removing such code after development is a huuuuge headache. this is something that needs to be planned for during development in most cases.
so yeah, there is some upfront cost associated with SKG, mostly in that the new regulations would need some rethinking about how to handle these code modules.
either through new or more open licenses, careful design that allows for the removal of problematic modules before release to the community, etc.
it’s not a big cost, but it is there. and creating new requirements for the code, integrating that into review cycles, testing the removals, and on and on the list goes. it’s mostly a management issue, but it’s by no means trivial.
not that any of this is a deal breaker, but it should be kept in my mind that these new regulations are not entirely free… it’s gonna cause some chaos in the industry. manageable chaos, but all chaos is somewhat expensive, when it comes to industry.
- Comment on Does anyone else find it suspicious that there wasn't any criticism on here about Stop Killing Games until after it hit 1.4M signatures? 5 weeks ago:
where PirateSoftware is coming from
see, I’m afraid it’s simply down to money.
so I’m not convinced it would be all that productive to talk to ross.
he made the assertion, without evidence, that the petition would kill live service games, and then based everything else on that flawed premise.
it has been explained to him that this is not the case, multiple times over.
he, as an ex blizzard employee amd avid WoW player, should know exactly just how popular private servers for WoW are (used to be? haven’t played in about 10 years, but used to play a lot on warmane myself).
that makes his takes especially weird, since that’s a perfect example of how game preservation for live service games could look like! (although I’m sure corporate was ‘not amused’ by those servers at all…)
this implies to me, that his motives are not at all honorable.
the most likely explanation, which is entirely speculation on my part, is simply fear of missing out on profits, if he ever gets his game out.
or that creating his game is going to take so long (cause he spends all his time streaming instead of working on his game), that he’ll basically have to start over, since by that point he probably will have to comply with the new regulations, eating into his profits.
imho: doesn’t really matter what his motivations are, because his opinions are harmful to everyone enjoying games, period. and that, weirdly enough, includes himself!
so I’m not very optimistic on this point, but i would like to be wrong!
at least that would most likely be, because there’s a more interesting explanation…
And honestly, that makes me want to watch those other streamers less.
I’m the same!
drama turns me off content creators, not the other way around…
(i only know about the drama, because so much has been showing up in the recommendations under the videos i do watch…i have watched exactly none of the drama/reaction videos)
the problem with the streamer/yt drama machine i have specifically, is that all the creators that jumped on that particular wagon were dead silent on the initiative in the first place.
and that’s the real tragedy: a whole group of people, whose livelihoods, even if they don’t necessarily depend on games, are very much enhanced by them a LOT, did fuckall to support the initiative. nothing.
…until they saw an opportunity to profit off the drama!
THAT’S what gets me!
these are all people that are supposedly (and i really do believe largely honestly) passionate about games!
…until it might eat into their profits to share something that would benefit them AND their audience.
the utter lack of solidarity is what really turns me off about these people…
(well…in addition to everything else about streamers… I don’t like streamers very much in general…never understood the appeal…)
It doesn’t need YTers to create a bunch of drama about it.
yeah, but this point is an issue with the outrage-based economy of online content, not this particular case…
sucks in it’s entirety, but until we manage to decouple content from ad revenue we’re stuck with it.
only solution i see is to declare the internet a utility (which it obviously IS, but try telling that to the money people…)
- Comment on The industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative | Accursed Farms 5 weeks ago:
yeah, no.
it just straight up isn’t.
if you think it is, then that’s a misunderstanding of the expression on your part.
it was neutral, and it was even accompanied by an “lmao” to indicate that it shouldn’t be taken all that seriously.
if you choose to interpret it only in the strictest possible, probably because you were already upset in the first place, I’m sorry to say, that’s on you. not them.
it was an okay-ish comment:
neither especially offensive, nor especially friendly.
maybe read it again when you’re more chilled out? merely a suggestion…
- Comment on Does anyone else find it suspicious that there wasn't any criticism on here about Stop Killing Games until after it hit 1.4M signatures? 5 weeks ago:
he’s repeatedly refused to talk to ross;
after the first video pirate software uploaded about SKG, ross left a comment offering clarifications and a chance to talk about the petition and surrounding misconceptions.
ross was refused an answer.
then PS uploaded more videos, and streams, with even more misinformation.
ross ignored it at that point and just continued doing his thing, advocating for the petition, giving updates, etc.
then it looked like the petition would fail, so ross decided there’s nothing left to lose by talking about the drama with PS, and lo and behold, suddenly all youtubers and streamers were suuuper onboard, helped spread the drama, and as a consequence SKG reached its goal… because of the drama.
so a net positive overall, but sad that it’s only because drama sells ads on streaming and video sites…really just a dumb state of affairs…
and to be clear: ross wasn’t at all vindictive in his video. frustrated by the situation, yes, but ultimately it was a very fair and sober response.
highly recommend checking it out; from what you said so far, i think you’ll enjoy the level-headed approach ross took!
- Comment on The industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative | Accursed Farms 5 weeks ago:
“what’s your problem?” is a common expression. it’s a phrase, it isn’t literal.
- Comment on The industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative | Accursed Farms 5 weeks ago:
that wasn’t a personal attack.
a personal attack would be:
“man, are you just a dick or what?”
what they asked is simply a request for you to explain your motivations, since they seem nonsensical to the previous poster.
(and immediately jumping to “personal attack” when someone is trying to understand you doesn’t exactly imply “peak intellect” either. and btw, your snarky “peak intellect” <-- THAT’S a personal attack. phrasing it as a statement doesn’t make it less of an insult.)
- Comment on The industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative | Accursed Farms 5 weeks ago:
tl;dr: it’s far from perfect, but it is a decent compromise.
what you’re talking about are government applications, which can take many different forms.
some can be filled out anonymously (often things like complaints, sometimes even lawsuits, etc.), and some need to have a verifiable identity attached (for example petitions, like SKG).
the reason the latter needs proof of identity is to prevent spam and unlawful influence campaign: if there was no verification, how could you know that it is actually citizens filing these requests, and not bad and/or foreign actors?
what if you had a European Citizens Initiative called “let’s join the russian federation” that got to 50 Million signatures overnight?
obviously seems fishy…so how would you verify wether it was actually supported by your own citizens?
this is why you need verification: it’s simply not an option to have this sort of thing filed anonymously.
there are some ideas on how to do this digitally, mostly focused on pseudonymization, which would be mostly great, but the current system is pretty decent.
there’s a tradeoff happening, and it’s one that has to be extremely carefully considered:
on the one hand, you’d want citizens to be free to support whatever campaigns they want without fear of repercussions, social or otherwise.
on the other hand, it’s also a good thing when people can’t hide behind anonymity when voicing their support. with the recent rise of nazis, that’s certainly a prudent state of affairs.
both ways of doing things have advantages and disadvantages.
the current system of public support tends to favor either quite conservative (as in traditionalistic and broadly accepted socially, not as in the “conservative politics”) initiatives over more reformative ones, but it also suppresses utterly unhinged Initiatives of the right wing factions.
as much as i understand that many groups would prefer a more anonymous approach, i honestly think the current approach, under the current state of affairs, offers much needed protection against nazi influence campaigns.
i think people underestimate how much more comfortable nazis get, when they can hide behind anonymity.
they are cowards be default, and anonymity helps them find a whole lot more acceptance than having their names out in the open…
as for why complaints can be filed anonymously… probably the same reasoning, but in reverse:
protecting people from repercussions is more important when it is about reporting current misgivings, than it is when petitioning for change.
think whistleblowers: they NEED anonymity.
without anonymity, a lot remains unreported, because many people tend to shoot the messenger first, ask questions later or never…so protections are required, mostly in form of anonymity, otherwise no one ever finds out about things going wrong…
- Comment on Day 365 of posting a Daily Screenshot from the games I've been playing (One Year Anniversary!) 5 weeks ago:
ah, that’s a bit of a shame!
totally get it though: it’s not for everyone…
- Comment on Day 365 of posting a Daily Screenshot from the games I've been playing (One Year Anniversary!) 5 weeks ago:
since you mentioned enjoying hopping into a game for a bit in the sea of thieves section, maybe try some rogoulikes/-lites?
try out hades: fun, fast paced, neat story, satisfying gameplay loop, variety, and I’m pretty sure it’s on sale! ;)
- Comment on Valve gets pressured by payment processors with a new rule for game devs and various adult games removed 5 weeks ago:
you can filter them out by blocking the adult content tag, no?
- Comment on We need to start calling it Simulater Intelligence (SI): here's why: 5 weeks ago:
no, none of those are what i mean, that’s way too specific to be useful.
a system exhibits intelligence when it can use existing insights to build entirely new insights.
a popular example is that no current “AI” can extrapolate from basic mathematical stipulations to more advanced ones.
(there’s tons of example you could put here, but this is the one i like)
here’s the example:
teach an LLM/DNN/etc. basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
give it some arbitrary, but large, number of problems to solve.
it will eventually encounter a division that isn’t possible, but is not a divide-by-zero (which should be covered by the rules it was given).
then it will either:
- throw an error
- have an aneurysm
- admit it can’t do that (proving the point)
- or lie through it’s teeth, giving wrong answers (also proving the point)
…but what it will definitely NEVER do, is simply create a placeholder for that operation and give it a name: square root (or whatever ot calls it, that part isn’t important).
it simply can’t, because that would be a new insight, and that’s something these systems aren’t capable of.
a human (or a lot of them) would encounter these impossible divisions and eventually see a pattern in them and draw the proper conclusion: that this is a new bit of math that was just discovered! with new rules, and new applications!
even if it takes a hundred years and scores of them, humans will always, eventually, figure it out.
…but what we currently call “artificial intelligence” will simply never understand that. the machine won’t do that, no matter how many machines you throw at the problem.
because it’s not a matter of quantity, but of quality.
and that qualitative difference is intelligence!
(note: solving this particular math problem is a first step. it’s unlikely that it will immediately lead to an AGI, but it is an excellent proof-of-concept)
this is also why LLMs aren’t really getting any better; it’s a structural problem that can’t be solved with bigger data sets.
it’s a fundamental design flaw we haven’t yet solved.
current "AI"s are probably a part of the solution, but they are, definitely, not THE solution.
we’ve come closer to an AI, but we’re not there.
- Comment on We need to start calling it Simulater Intelligence (SI): here's why: 5 weeks ago:
when it can come up with a solution it hasn’t seen before.
that’s the threshold.
that’s the threshold for creative problem solving, which isn’t all there is to intelligence, but i think it’s fair to say it’s the most crucial part for a machine intelligence.
- Comment on Opinions on the internet 2 months ago:
the “paradox” as the user above pointed out, simply isn’t a paradox at all:
“A” = “not A” is never a true statement in any sort of logical framework.
and that’s all that the “paradox” really says: a society cannot be tolerant AND intolerant at the same time. it has to pick one.
it boils down to “you can’t have it both ways”, and that is the intended meaning.
i believe a grave mistake was made by popper when he popularized the concept as a “paradox” rather than a simple logical, and by no means new, conclusion.
in his attempt to frame it in a technical/philosophical context for his peers, he inadvertently made it seem like some kind of nebulous, unknowable dilemma to the general population.
there is not, and has never been, a dilemma here. it’s simply a logical conclusion.
it’s kind of like the whole misunderstanding of “theory” vs “hypothesis” leading to the now-common “evolution is just a theory” among religious fundamentalists.
“it’s just a theory” is wrong, because a theory in a scientific context is proven true, there’s nothing hypothetical about it.
in a similar vein, the “paradox” is a only a paradox in the sense that it seems counter-intuitive at first glance that a tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, but the conclusion is crystal clear.
and that last part seems lost on people, because when the average person hears the word “paradox” they assume that there is no conclusion or definitive answer to something, when in this case, there is a definite conclusion.
and that assumption of “paradox = dilemma” is why people constantly misunderstand the paradox of tolerance. the assumption is wrong.
popper called the conclusion “paradoxical”, which isn’t the same as something being an actual paradox.
i really wish they’d used a different name for the concept, because the name is a terrible case of misnomer…
- Comment on The Expanse: Osiris Reborn Announcement Trailer 2 months ago:
in other contexts, your husband could very well have a point…but not when it’s about the expanse.
when the entire point is realism, these little things, even when they seem pedantic, become jarring.
after all; it’s a series by space nerds, for space nerds! ;)