This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - MarKhan
Pages: 1 ... 414243 4445 ... 115
1261
« on: April 04, 2019, 04:33:45 PM »
1262
« on: April 04, 2019, 04:26:31 PM »
1263
« on: April 04, 2019, 11:44:29 AM »
1264
« on: April 04, 2019, 11:24:47 AM »
This is evidence there's a God. I take back everything I said about this site needing to be shut down. As long as Verbatim reports on his pain to this website, it deserves to exist.
Who is this clown?
A fan of divine justice.
Verb openly wants to destroy the human race.
He deserves pain, and only once the torture cannot grow worse, death.
It's not up to you to judge, fan of divine justice
1265
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:15:07 AM »
Is it Epic Store exclusive? Because that's what I see on borderlands website.
I hope it's an April fools joke
From what I'm hearing it looks like it will be, which is really disappointing. I really can't stand third party developers doing exclusive deals with platforms.
It'll be for 6 months, thanks to 2K. Real problem here is not even exclusivity, it's how garbage Epic Store is. I also heard that Epic's privacy policy doesn't comply with GDPR and that store itself tries to get info from Steam w/o user knowing. Epic CEO proclaimed that Epic going to be prodeveloper, rather than proconsumer. For a consumer it's better off pirating game than buying it.
1266
« on: April 03, 2019, 10:39:08 AM »
Is it Epic Store exclusive? Because that's what I see on borderlands website. I hope it's an April fools joke
1267
« on: April 01, 2019, 02:36:54 PM »
1268
« on: April 01, 2019, 01:27:14 PM »
Spoiler First RR of 2019; Fuck you OP. ♥
Spoiler Though I was smarter then this.
Spoiler I don't know what I expected
Martin O'Donnell really rocked this time, didn't he?
1269
« on: April 01, 2019, 08:31:38 AM »
1270
« on: April 01, 2019, 04:20:28 AM »
1271
« on: March 31, 2019, 02:07:29 PM »
Overthinking, overanalyzing separates the body from the mind
Withering my intuition, missing opportunities, and I must
Feed my will to feel my moment, drawing way outside the lines
1272
« on: March 31, 2019, 12:16:47 PM »
What exactly have they supposedly changed in the MCC? Sound is pretty bad and the exact same problems of poor connectivity and overall bullshit still exist just the same.
Correction: the Halo 2 remaster is the first one I've played that actually feels snappy and good. Got 23 kills in my first team slayer game there.
Join the Sep7agon squad for MCC
How?
By sending me and Boomdeyadah friend requests obviously
Eh, I don't see myself playing much more of this. I only renewed my Gold for one month to play with my brother last night. It was fun to get in some games with him but the state of the game just doesn't seem to be that great. Overall performance is pretty bad, the hit registration is kind of embarrassing for 2019, the amount of quitters / AFKers is insane, matches are rarely balanced (like, we were split-screening and ran into the same 4 man team of American tryhards repeatedly - all with twitch links in their name, identical tags and just overall toxic behavior). Let's hope they do better for the PC release.
True Halo experience?
1273
« on: March 31, 2019, 10:10:04 AM »
1274
« on: March 31, 2019, 04:02:43 AM »
I don't know if I can even have it anymore, I had it way too many times in past and I just got emotionally detached from everything really. Or maybe I just obtained exceptional control over my emotions, I don't know.
1275
« on: March 30, 2019, 04:16:18 PM »
1276
« on: March 30, 2019, 11:54:45 AM »
It doesn't help that final text of article is hard to find either, I tried to look for it on my own yesterday and I really had to go out my way to find it. You would think that it would be somewhere on a frontpage of EU parlament website, but I had to go on EU parlament site -> News -> Copyright -> "European Parliament approves new copyright rules for the internet" -> Further info under this article -> Q&A and there was a link to it.
At least wikipedia provides link to the article too now.
1277
« on: March 30, 2019, 11:18:47 AM »
Yeah, I also hate when my cats do that
1278
« on: March 30, 2019, 04:07:05 AM »
1279
« on: March 29, 2019, 02:34:22 AM »
At this point this is a Meme Thread (depressed weeb edition TM) ©.
1280
« on: March 29, 2019, 01:15:54 AM »
My man, I'm proud of you. You've got a future in law if the programming doesn't work out for you. :p
It's not hard to be jack of all trades, it's hard to master something.
1281
« on: March 29, 2019, 01:09:06 AM »
So it looks like a blanket solution to copyright infringement? Instead of pointing at the infringer they point at the platform, how is this a sane idea?
Its absolutely prime grounds for shady shit even if it doesnt affect everyday antics
Well, it only applies to certain online platforms and does nothing to diminish the liability of the infringers as well, so there's that. Definitely not supposed to be a blanket solution or anything. Also, the Directive consists of over 30 articles that talk about other aspects of copyright as well in order to better protect artists and copyright holders. Only 2 of them are controversial.
The idea behind it is pretty straightforward. Say you're an artist or content creator who makes videos, music, literature, animations, design, pictures, paintings or anything like it. It doesn't matter if you're a small independent artist on Soundcloud or Deviantart or a huge corporation or label putting out major shows, movies or pop songs - you own the rights to your creations. Imagine now that someone steals your video, song, animation or content and uploads it on Youtube themselves. I'm not talking about fair use like in a meme or review, but just blatant stealing and reuploading your content as their own. In this case, you're not going to be making any money off of it even though you deserve to be compensated for your work, and neither is the person who stole your content. So who does make money here? Youtube. Because the platform runs ads on just about every video and thereby makes (100% of the) revenue every time someone watches your content without any obligation or requirement to compensate you as well, even though it's making money off of your work. This is what the Directive aims to address by requiring platforms like Youtube to try and get a license with you to distribute part of the money they make from your content, and to work with you to stop unwanted infringements on their platform.
I personally don't agree with all of it but it's a lot more nuanced than what some people make it out to be.
You make it sound like its just a copyright law extension with means of stopping platforms benefiting from others works. But then why is everyone up in arms about it? If its too long and nuanced you dont have to go into it.
Everyone is up in arms because it is beefing up copyright but will never be monitored by people. Lets use Youtube as an example, so someone steals your video, thats easy sure, but what if its a review, a parody, background music, hell what if you terribly sing a song for 10 seconds, theres the strike.
Its a system that will be easily and legally abused and the content creators who use other peoples content legally under the right context will suffer.
BECAUSE, this wont be monitored by people, it will be checked off by algorithms which dont understand context, and this will be abused and used to siphon money from people who make measly pennies.
And finally even if it isnt being abused the content could just be taken down because the automatic systems dont understand that most of this content does not breach copyright.
Everyone up in arms, because apparently people think that older version of article was passed. I didn't see anyone mention that article was renamed from 13 to 17, which might imply that people just didn't notice that it was updated. Older versions of article might have monitoring as a requirement, however current version of article explicitly states that application of this article does not lead to any general monitoring obligation.
1282
« on: March 28, 2019, 05:48:06 PM »
Article however requires from rightholder to justify takedown, making spamming takedown requests hard. Article also requires from EU countries to implement mechanisms to solve problems w/o court. And article requires from service to implement an effective system for user to dispute claim and/or give an explanation to user on a situation.
As I said, this article is just an update to keep up with times.
1283
« on: March 28, 2019, 05:21:14 PM »
So it looks like a blanket solution to copyright infringement? Instead of pointing at the infringer they point at the platform, how is this a sane idea?
Its absolutely prime grounds for shady shit even if it doesnt affect everyday antics
Well, platform basically has only to remove content and only when rightholder notified platform, gave platform all specific info about content in question and give a reason. This is already present in E-commerse law from 2001, so current form of article doesn't change anything here really. Also if platform can't do this or if it ruins it's business, platform won't be responsible.
1284
« on: March 28, 2019, 04:47:42 PM »
this is the worst thread ever made on sep7agon
1285
« on: March 28, 2019, 04:39:50 PM »
If anyone is interested in reading it, here is the linkAlso Article 11 and 13 are now 15 and 17 respectivelly. Article 15 is page 116, Article 17 is 120.
1286
« on: March 28, 2019, 04:30:23 PM »
Say i meme some corps advertisement and put in on youtube, could they not take it down?
They shouldn't.
But thats just a basic copyright law, what is this new article then
Well, from what I understand, basically it's a directive to update to earlier laws and it's done to adapt 2k something year's laws to todays situation with internet and what it changes is it makes online content sharing platforms be responsible for copyrighted material posted on their services. Article in it's initial state was terrible, it required authorisation from rightholder to use their material and what does it meant was that users could post copyrighted material and platform hosting would be responsible for it. In this case platforms would probably had to implement hard filters and it would lead to mass censorship basically. However obviously there was backlash and under few years article was rewritten. At this moment, for a platform to be responsible to copyright infringment, it needs to not obtain an authorisation to use copyrighted material AND to receieve and ignore proper request from rightholder AND not remove copyrighted material from a platform. And even then rightholder can't sent platform to court right away, court is the last resourt. Also size of punishment and whether service receieves one depends on type, audience and size of it, meaning that if service can't prevent copyright infringment, then it won't be punished and it cannot be expected from it to prevent it. This article applies only to commersial services, it doesn't apply to Wikipedia and GitHub for example. That's how I understand it. There are other stuff in article worth mentioning, most of them are "safeguards" so directive wouldn't go too deep, but at the core of it it's this.
1287
« on: March 28, 2019, 03:45:30 PM »
Say i meme some corps advertisement and put in on youtube, could they not take it down?
They shouldn't.
1288
« on: March 28, 2019, 12:33:40 PM »
I feel a deja vu
It was a surprisingly good stream. We had 50+ viewers just watching me go over the new Copyright Directive until Rapha and Vengeur started streaming. Good stuff. 
No, I mean you did a simillar titled thread before, I think it was in september
1289
« on: March 28, 2019, 12:28:58 PM »
I feel a deja vu
1290
« on: March 28, 2019, 12:23:27 PM »
this is the worst thread ever made on sep7agon
that's the point
Pages: 1 ... 414243 4445 ... 115
|
Show Posts
