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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Why does your comment have so many downvotes?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That’s just a description of what the license actually does, non-commercial usage of my content.
It’s actually not even my description, it’s one I got from someone else, who’s also licensing their content with the same license.
I have no problem with my content being used for non-commercial purposes.
No, I do not. My intent aligns with ProPublica.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
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.
I’m terrified for when they start adding animation to the anti ai signatures
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.