MajorasMaskForever @ MajorasMaskForever @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

83

Joined

2 yr. ago

Props to you for actually attributing the quote to the writer and not the character. It's a pet peeve of mine when people take profound sounding quotes and attribute it to a fictional character that never existed, never had real thoughts or opinions of their own

Closing bracket indented with current level?

Lol yup, got the idea from a Technology Connections video on how one of the common humidifier designs are literally just large swamp coolers

I've taken to using an old cake pan, a desk fan, and a towel. Fill up the pan with water, stick one end of the towel in the water, drape and clip the other end to the fan and let it sit running for a few days. Before the towel gets gross, toss it in the laundry when it's dry and grab another towel

It works so well I'm completely confused as to how/why there isn't a commercialized product like that, it completely solves the cleaning/highschool biology experiments problem

Man I was so hyped for Zelda HD back in the day off of that TP art style demo. The hype cycle around BotW was wild

They mean they're looking at what laws the guy may have broken, not exclusively 1A. Probable cause gives cops a limited ability to arrest and ask questions later, and public nuisance laws absolutely are a thing.

It should be noted that stadium security initially held him, but the police did not detain him, and have not charged with him a crime because he did not commit one.

Sauce for that last part

Edited cause Sync messed up the link

It's so incredibly annoying when people use smaller order of magnitude descriptors simply so they can then write more zeros. A good chunk of the time too it feels like it's done to distract from a different point or to exaggerate without technically lying.

Doesn't help that technical jargon is only best used when communicating with someone in that field or understands it. Big number + alphabet soup always seems scary 😞

I'm curious as to what the worst one is. GIMP is pretty bad, KiCAD has pronunciation problems, nothing else is coming to mind

Did you not understand anything I typed out?

LMG used GN material, yes.

LMG did not commit plagiarism

LMG did not violate copyright law

Words have meanings, and by the definitions of the words plagiarism and copyright LMG does not meet the criteria. You and I do not get to change the definitions to fit whatever narrative we have in our heads on who we want to be the good guys and who we want to be the bad guys

That is not what plagiarism means

Oxford English Dictionary

The action or practice of taking someone else's work, idea, etc., and passing it off as one's own

Merriam-Webster

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source

Dictionary.com

an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author

All three definitions clearly state that Plagiarism is taking some production of someone else's and claiming it as your own. That there is some kind of deception going on as to who created the original thought/work. Merriam-Webster's definition has that second component talking about the act of using without crediting the source, which LMG didn't do at first but later added a pinned comment. While not immediate and the barest amount of effort on LMGs part, but it still is credit.

Plagiarism has no legal component to its definition.

Copyright does have legal implications as it is someone's right to duplicate a work. In general a creator of a work has exclusive rights to reproduce it, but there are exceptions (everyone's favorite Fair Use laws). With LMG being Canadian the legal side is more complicated but in US courts it's been tested that one such exception is around additional commentary and that the usage of the work was limited as to what was relevant to being actively discussed (big case here being H3H3 a few years back). Even by GN's own admission the WAN show was taking phrases and repeating them verbatim, but just that, only phrases. Ones pertaining directly to the on hand topic of EVGAs ending partnership with Nvidia. They were not showing GNs video, reading his script word for word start to finish. Again, IANAL but I find it highly unlikely that a US or Canadian court would say that what LMG did on WAN Show meets the definition of a copyright violation

Edit:

And to answer your last point directly, Plagiarism and Copyright are orthogonal to each other. You could plagiarize by not giving public credit but still get copy permission from the copyright holder. Semantically kinda weird to think about

I took Linus's statement to mean that he doesn't understand why he is continuing to get heat from GN since they have addressed the issues GN pointed out.

The could sue but won't part I think it's coming more from a context with the ongoing Honey lawsuit, since at least on WAN show its been brought up several times that people recommend LMG join the lawsuit and Linus repeatedly refusing because as he puts it, he's not a litigious person. Given the rest of the his plea in that segment for the viewers to not go after GN, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on it. I also personally give a lot of leeway to people and organizations who have admitted mistakes in the past and corrected them so that definitely feeds into me choosing not to interpret things the way you are, even though I can see why you view it that way.

And yeah the dedicated clips channel video was moronically named imho. Linus or someone else at LMG should have vetoed it, it's a serious topic and deserves to be taken as such. If they felt the need to make a joke, do it like the "channel this angry energy into powering RTX 5090s". A small quip at the end, not leading into things

Are we talking copyright or plagiarism here? GN is claiming plagiarism, not copyright infringement

Edit: spelling

I'm not sure these are the receipts GamersNexus believes them to be. They're all kinda stretching things into a gray area.

The plagiarism part is straight up incorrect. LMG did not say that their discussion was original reporting. The WAN show is explicitly a podcast reacting to news articles and events (WAN = Weekly Analysis and News). Plagerism needs a "passing off as your own" piece, while IANAL given react content typically ends up in the fair use category because of additional commentary and thoughts being added, the WAN show doesn't have to disclose sources. Usually on WAN show they mention where they heard of the story, and not mentioning GN is a dick move, but it's not plagiarism.

The history of not following up on issues was definitely better addressed in the original GN video. But at the same time, this just makes it seems like GN is trying to use the argument "Hey we warned you once that some of your methodologies aren't great and led to skewed results and you didn't really react, so now we're gonna release an hour long video on all of your previous fuck ups and not tell you, k thx bi*"

To Linus's original point on not getting a heads up, that's not industry standard behavior and also kind of a dick move.

The unprofessional communication part I can go either way with. Would I talk to my boss like that? No. Technical mentors and peers that I had a good relationship with? Absolutely and I have done it. By the book it's unprofessional it's hardly the damning statements Gamers Nexus is trying to sell them as.

Also for those of you who have not watched any LMG content since that original GN video, LMG has cleaned up their act quite a bit, so credit where credit is due. Linus also only asked for receipts since he was getting increasingly frustrated with several negative comments coming from GN whereas on the LMG side they've continued to praise and recommend GN content

There's a few threads over on Reddit and the LTT forum about how Linus has apparently handled this all wrong, they should have made a video years ago, Linus being dismissive of if on WAN show is him being detached from reality, you know, the usual bullshit

Edit: ITT https://lemmy.world/comment/14273487

In fairness to me (and maybe you) Sync didn't load the comment initially so only after I kept reading I found it

Realistically no. The support needed to manage the devices we all use is just insane, and I think a lot of people take for granted how the x86 platform has evolved over the last few decades. The ARM landscape does not have the standards set that x86 does and that will always hold it back. Qualcomm learned long ago that it's within their best interest to be constantly changing the SoCs and never really documenting/supporting them very well because it forces all of the downstream vendors to do constant refreshes. Toss in the development hellscape my fellow programmers created ourselves and we get the vicious cycle we're in today where Google saying they'll support a device for longer than a few years was the headline sales pitch

-typed on a Pixel 8 which was purchased due to that sales pitch

Freshly picked Tingles Rosy Rupeeland is a masterpiece and the most important game in the series, I will not hear otherwise

Partially agree. The series as a whole fully agree, game by game is iffy

XC1 can absolutely stand alone and really needs you to go in blind

XCFC doesn't make sense without having played XC1

XC2 again can stand alone but you'll catch some story stuff sooner if you'd played XC1

XCTTGC makes no sense without XC2

XC3 is this bizzaro mess I'm still not sure what the fuck happened but I think it does need XC1 and 2 background knowledge

XCFR retains XC3 heavy reliance on the previous games, but cranked up to levels that makes the Star Wars sequels seem almost reasonable

How dare you, you forgot the Ardanian soldier. He was very specific and clear

The real metric is dollars per second of destroyed hardware ;)

I once watched an engineer blow up a $200k prototype with a terminal alias.

Heh, I guess this shows my corporate software dev experience. Whenever I've taught git workflows it was always paired with a work ticketing system where any changes you were making were ideally all one single set of changes. If you need a feature or bug fix someone else was doing that was being done on another branch which you could pull into your code early and for tracking purposes we always made sure the other person merged into main first. The only time I've seen per line manipulation with git was when someone made a ton of changes in a file and wanted to revert a handful of lines.

Everything else you mentioned I've had a web git host like gitlab or bitbucket for, but I kinda put that more into peer review workflow than git itself