this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2023
108 points (70.8% liked)

Games

32654 readers
1222 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 75 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Fuckin' SSSLLAAmmMMMMmEeeDddd, dude!

Like a trashcan lid to the head!

[–] million@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How will they survive such a thorough slamming?

I can’t wait until we are on the other side of the slammed. I am sure it will be replaced by an equally annoying word choice.

[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 10 points 10 months ago

NEWS SITE CLAMWHOLLOPED FOR USING OLD, ANNOYING VERB

[–] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 73 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Always downvote slammed articles

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

@pregnenolone has been Slamming slammed articles!

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 42 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] buzziebee@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I hate this trend of saying "SLAMMED", or "HOUNDED", or "ATTACKED" etc in news articles where the stories are just "a couple of people with a dozen followers between them posted slightly negative tweets about topic xyz".

My parents were bitching about how Adele was "HAMMERED" online because she said "I am proud to be a woman" or something. Turns out it was just two complete nobodies tweeting about how that's trans exclusionary or something with 1 heart each.

[–] wolfshadowheart@slrpnk.net 6 points 10 months ago

Buzzibee absolutely DISMANTLING article headlines! More above!

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

It's just so they can still write an article even though nothing really happened

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 1 points 10 months ago

I'm looking forward to the day when someone legitimately goes ham on someone else, profanity, yelling, the whole 9 yards, and the articles are all like, "so-and-so somewhat disagrees on such-and-such".

[–] Guntrigger@feddit.ch 1 points 10 months ago

AFAIK it comes from tabloid headlines needing less words to fit on newsprint and remember it 30 years ago (it was just a stupid sounding then). I have no idea why it's made the translation to online news in recent years

[–] alienanimals@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Gosh, I pray they're not using Photoshop as well! Won't someone think of the children??

[–] kaboom36@ani.social 6 points 10 months ago

Photoshop still requires human creative input and isn't built on a foundation of theft

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is why we need a rule that if you incorporate your logo into AI art, your logo becomes public domain.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

This is technically already legal precedence in USA, copyright requires human expression and without sufficient human creative control in ML generated works they're effectively public domain

Edit: why downvotes?

https://www.96layers.ai/p/why-ai-generated-content-cant-be

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, for the imagery itself, but their logo is still under trademark. What I’m saying is if you put your logo on AI generated imagery and release it to the public, you no longer own a trademark for your logo.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's not how courts are going to treat it. Public domain (lack of) licensing is not "infectious". Instead you can just cut out the trademark and reuse ML images because under current legal precedence they're in public domain but the trademark isn't

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I understand that. I’m saying I want to change that.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 months ago

Good luck with that

[–] danielbln@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I'm guessing so the maintainers of the AI don't have to worry about copyright when it uses the logo somewhere unexpected. But I'm curious what OP says.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

They have their own Bing Image Creator. Obviously they'd prefer to use their own tool instead of hiring artists. Everyone with two working brain cells saw this coming. (I'm not defending it, it was just obvious the day Bing Image Creator was launched.)

[–] CorrodedCranium@leminal.space 13 points 10 months ago

I really don't care one way or the other. I think AI being used is an inevitability. I think it would only really be relevant if Microsoft had a policy against AI being used in games for things like asset generation for example.

[–] rab@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

"Energy intensive art" lol

[–] aluminium@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Just as much love as Microsoft shows the rest of Xbox